pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (7059 of them)
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 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

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

nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:10 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

it's more that they used that as their _hook_

x-post

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:20 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

omg that is horrorshow

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

HI DERE, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:18 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

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

Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:23 (8 years ago) Permalink

I'm more bothered by beck as impeccable influence

dmr, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:24 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

ugh, "impeccable influences" is really repulsive.

Hurting 2, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:46 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

He was worked up?

roxymuzak, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:49 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

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

elan, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:16 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

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

if anything, that reads like a good reason not to check out the album....

stephen, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:28 (8 years ago) Permalink

richter scale is logarithmic xpost

but kudos nonetheless

elan, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:42 (8 years ago) Permalink

yeah sorry the "actually" sounded like I was disagreeing when it more of an "yeah and" thing

Alex in Baltimore, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:43 (8 years ago) Permalink

No band has marked indie's prog revival more definitively than Battles: Their debut, Mirrored, took rock for a set of puzzle pieces, but was ultimately defined by its pictorial sensibility-- each song felt like a cartoon soundtrack-- and the incorporation of jokes into the most historically humorless music in the known world.

latebloomer, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:43 (8 years ago) Permalink

wtf, wtf -- wtf? -- wtf!

Hurting 2, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:45 (8 years ago) Permalink

the incorporation of JOKES

s1ocki, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:46 (8 years ago) Permalink

ya i saw that too... pretty lazy writing

s1ocki, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:46 (8 years ago) Permalink

How can you get paid to write if you don't know what "but" means?

HI DERE, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:51 (8 years ago) Permalink

jokes?!?!? has dude ever read the back of a don cab/a minor forest/whoever cd?

YGS, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:53 (8 years ago) Permalink

That bothers me more in a semantic sense: I think the album has a sense of humor, sure, but I don't know what "jokes" refers to in a largely instrumental piece of work.

jaymc, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:56 (8 years ago) Permalink

joeks, bruv

Ned Raggett, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:56 (8 years ago) Permalink

You can here an interpolation of classic knock-knock jokes in "Atlas".

HI DERE, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:06 (8 years ago) Permalink

<i>jokes?!?!? has dude ever read the back of a don cab/a minor forest/whoever cd?

-- YGS, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:53 (10 minutes ago) Link</i>

"jokes" was horrible word choice on my part--john is right--but come on, do you really think that having a punny song title is the same as making music that is formally and sonically <i>humorous</i>? eh. don cab always struck me as definitively unfunny, they just tried to compensate with SURREAL HEADLINES.

mike powell, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:08 (8 years ago) Permalink

Ha, I didn't even read the review, so I didn't know it was you, Mike.

jaymc, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:11 (8 years ago) Permalink

There is a strong semantic difference between "humor" and "jokes"; they shouldn't be used interchangeably and, based on your followup here, you definitely meant the former.

Also, why did you use "but" as your conjunction? The second clause does not invert, negate, contradict or palpably change the meaning of the first clause (Mirrored being defined by pictoral sensibility and humor is not a condition that lies in opposition to it viewing rock as a set of puzzle pieces), so your sentence winds up not making any sense; you've either left out a critical piece of information or just flat-out used the wrong word.

HI DERE, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:19 (8 years ago) Permalink

There is a strong semantic difference between "humor" and "jokes"; they shouldn't be used interchangeably and, based on your followup here, you definitely meant the former.

Also, why did you use "but" as your conjunction? The second clause does not invert, negate, contradict or palpably change the meaning of the first clause (Mirrored being defined by pictoral sensibility and humor is not a condition that lies in opposition to it viewing rock as a set of puzzle pieces), so your sentence winds up not making any sense; you've either left out a critical piece of information or just flat-out used the wrong word.

-- HI DERE, Friday, November 2, 2007 8:19 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

you're right, 'but' wasn't a great choice. i think the idea was to say that though it had this puzzle-like quality--you could talk about how the parts fit together, like everyone does in a math-rock review--it was, for me, defined by these more abstract qualities: its sense of humor, its ability to be pictorally evocative. sure, i get what you're saying.

but seriously--human being here, willing to engage, bristles as asinine comments like the "knock-knock joke" one. furthermore--and i'd never slag scott or mark because i know they're incredibly busy guys--i think you bring the same charges to an editor. just saying.

mike powell, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:28 (8 years ago) Permalink

sorry, you *could* bring the same charges. lord i grow weary of life's endless ironies.

mike powell, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:29 (8 years ago) Permalink

I'm just glad you're writing regularly.

jaymc, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:29 (8 years ago) Permalink

I think I'm pretty much firmly on record as someone who thinks there are a lot of editors out there who aren't doing what they should. This mostly stems from a desire to be an editor (ha).

Also I think the egregious misspelling of "hear" is more offensive than the actual knock-knock joke comment (which was an allusion to a recently-revived ILE thread).

HI DERE, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:35 (8 years ago) Permalink

Joke: pretending "Atlas" has a different lyric when he is very clearly singing

people like to
people like to
eat a sandwich

nabisco, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:37 (8 years ago) Permalink

Also I think the egregious misspelling of "hear" is more offensive than the actual knock-knock joke comment (which was an allusion to a recently-revived ILE thread).

-- HI DERE, Friday, November 2, 2007 8:35 PM (44 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

and there i thought you were just aping my ignorance and carelessness.

mike powell, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:37 (8 years ago) Permalink

(xpost - that's not actually funny, of course: people do like them some sandwiches)

nabisco, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:39 (8 years ago) Permalink

i always heard the "eat a sandwich" bit as "penis terror"

ciderpress, Friday, 2 November 2007 20:41 (8 years ago) Permalink

they should change their name to the Nazis next. and after that they could change it to the Khmer Rouge.

Οὖτις, Thursday, 14 January 2016 17:21 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

I’d done it again, only this would be the last time: I’d toyed with a fragile nervous system, dousing it with chemicals and warm bodies well past the hour when most mortals had already made it to the office somehow.

lots of humblebraggin in there

Copy rights, pleasing all star wars fans, hiring professionals. (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 14 January 2016 17:22 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

misread that as "full of germs" xxp

μpright mammal (mh), Thursday, 14 January 2016 17:25 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

admittedly i haven't read it, but

http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/999-carlos-dengler-on-how-david-bowie-gave-him-the-freedom-to-quit-interpol-and-find-himself/

what the world needed this week was a good ol' comparison of the guy from interpol to david bowie, written by the guy from interpol

― Karl Malone, Thursday, January 14, 2016 12:04 PM (31 minutes ago) Bookmark

J0rdan S., Thursday, 14 January 2016 17:38 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

haha thanks forks. that's a shame i half like the record i wish they weren't dumb

carly rae jetson (thomp), Friday, 15 January 2016 10:10 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

hey, back to that 80s list:

114) Talk Talk - “Life's What You Make It”

whaaaaa "RAINBOW" TOP 10 PLZ

niels, Friday, 15 January 2016 11:21 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

the '80s list was 2015? seems like years ago.

billstevejim, Friday, 15 January 2016 21:39 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

The decadence of the '00s was at an end. It was a time of conservation, of the profit principle, of high anxiety, of major label betrayals, of group therapy and raised voices, of cold, stony pursed lips on poker faces disguising a contagious terror that trickled down from managers and executives quivering in their boots. Free downloads threatened to take away yachts. The end of art was nigh, I could feel it.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 15 January 2016 21:47 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

I didn't even make it that far

Οὖτις, Friday, 15 January 2016 21:50 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

To top it off, I was sick of being in a band where my nickname was "Shamu."

tylerw, Friday, 15 January 2016 21:51 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

I didn't even make it that far

― Οὖτις,

The end of art was nigh.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 15 January 2016 21:53 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

man, that guy is a total buffoon.

hackshaw, Friday, 15 January 2016 21:53 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

i think everyone kinda knew they were wrong about "GOOD Fridays is back" even though they kept writing those completely unconfirmed words so many times throughout the past week as if it they could just make it true by writing them over and over again.

billstevejim, Saturday, 16 January 2016 20:19 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

it's music internet SOP now considering the ridiculous way people have acted about the Frank Ocean album

some dude, Saturday, 16 January 2016 20:43 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

Kanye Didn't Release A Track Last Friday, And That's OK

HYPERLINK TO RAP GENIUS (BradNelson), Saturday, 16 January 2016 20:48 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

Fucked up thing is I can no longer tell if that headline is for real or parody

Jimmywine Dyspeptic, Saturday, 16 January 2016 22:56 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

Of course, there’s a long tradition of rock musicians using heroin to inspire their best music—think Lou Reed, Neil Young, Keith Richards—but Smith found no truth in such myths. “You can’t write music when you’re high,” he says plainly. “You can’t do much of anything productive.”

I suppose the generous reading here is that Neil Young used *the subject* of heroin but still wtf editors

Οὖτις, Thursday, 21 January 2016 23:38 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

could've substituted any number of less ambiguous figures (Cobain as already mentioned in the article, Sonic Boom etc)

Οὖτις, Thursday, 21 January 2016 23:39 (2 weeks ago) Permalink

Wow, 2014? That was a little over a year ago! What have those dudes been up to?!

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 26 January 2016 14:37 (1 week ago) Permalink

Putting together an airtight case for any funkiness that could occur on this tour

I expel a minor traveler's flatulence (Sufjan Grafton), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 15:07 (1 week ago) Permalink

cannot believe a band waited a very normal (or what would even be the shorter end of normal) period of time btwn playing shows, what a world

police patrol felt the smell of smoke and found that goat burns (Stevie D(eux)), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 20:02 (1 week ago) Permalink

lol shocked they are doing something w David Byrne too. next you will tell me they have a remix coming.

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 20:17 (1 week ago) Permalink

DJ Windows 98 plays a viral Drake song

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Tuesday, 26 January 2016 20:18 (1 week ago) Permalink

Take note James Murphy - Pitchfork still covers you even if you don't announce a break as a breakup.

sctttnnnt (pgwp), Wednesday, 27 January 2016 02:30 (1 week ago) Permalink

this might be my last one? i have no idea. anyway, out now. me and king soto and beta and matos as well.

scott seward, Friday, 29 January 2016 19:23 (1 week ago) Permalink

yeah, just got the latest issue, looks great -- andy beta's alice coltrane thing is nice, lisa jane persky's NYC 70s piece too! and of course matos is fantastic on Prince. it's a nice mag! $20 is a ridiculous price, but I don't know, they do a good job. hope you keep doing columns, scott!

tylerw, Friday, 29 January 2016 19:29 (1 week ago) Permalink


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