pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

i feel like it's just something people say without examining why they're saying it. again, i realize there's a huge capacity for self-embarrassment there, but a musician is already writing recording and publicizing songs about their personal feelings and lives so what else have they got to lose.

Yeah, I actually fully disagree with you, aero. It's so obviously nagl but I think it's forgiveable, pardonable. And calling somebody an amateur? Dude states in his blog post that he and his band hold down temp work to make music, i.e. amateurs

it kinda IS a make-or-break thing for bands like the Fleet Foxes dude though.

(xpost)

Yeah, I actually fully disagree with you, aero. It's so obviously nagl but I think it's forgiveable, pardonable. And calling somebody an amateur? Dude states in his blog post that he and his band hold down temp work to make music, i.e. amateurs

that's not actually what "amateur" means

yeah, and fleet foxes "made it" already. with lots of help from pitchfork.

p-fork holds such weight these days that it feels like a make-or-break review for artists

Maybe not with listeners, but certainly with promoters and publicists

@ DJP. I think you're a member of AFM? If you are, you have to answer the question "Do you rely upon music for the majority of your income Y/N" and if it's Y, you are considered professional and are eligible, and if it's N, you are considered amateur and are not.

Lol at self for citing AFM as being anything other than "a source of terrible evil" but I'm 'splaining myself

the fleet foxes dude thing was remarkable in its butthurtedness

link pls?

xxp yeah i mean if ned had been like "10.0 medicine was the greatest shoegaze band ever better than mbv," that'd be a huge thing for them probably. just weird to have one publication carry that responsibility.

I am not a member of AFM, no

you lucky bastard

to be fair to the FF dude, this sentence from the pitchfork review is fucking horrific

The arrangements entertain a rhythmic stiffness that sticks strictly to the beat, without any syncopation to suggest the messy experiences Tillman’s lyrics evoke.”

plus it's not like most of the bands that Pitchfork reviews make any real money, so I doubt they really care much about their image or whatever; if you feel like it, do it

i think it's a risky move but one i'd like to see more musicians take on.

lol how is it risky? everybody does it now because via twitter & facebook & then they get immediate tonguebaths from the fanbase on their walls. then they RT the backscratching. it is pathetic.

it's true that one could, conceivably, reply briefly and wittily to criticism, but it's really just sad to rush to the public with your outraged!! response to a review. if you can't bear for people to "misunderstand" your art (i.e., to not agree with you about it), then you are probably better off keeping it to yourself.

because above

Tillman / FJM (ex-Fleet Foxes dude) was railing against P-Fork and their fest even before they reviewed his album. He just enjoys taking the piss.

I mean idk maybe I just don't get it. aerosmith for example is kinda polarizing, people who hate us hate us & it always feels horrible to read somebody saying that the hard work we put in isn't good, that they didn't enjoy it, that we've failed in our efforts - everybody wants approval, artists more than other people I think. but I can't imagine having such a low opinion of myself that I'd say "well! I suppose everyone wants to hear what I thought about this review that ran this morning, well here is my REBUTTAL!" the fuck. I like music criticism! the critic's job is not to understand you on your own terms, it's to report on how your attempt to communicate your vision came across

I guess there's The Axl Exception if you wanna write "Get In the Ring" and go big with your infantile need for absolutely everybody to kiss your ass but better yet, don't

c'mon, nobody hates aerosmith.

aerosmith haters -- About 7,930,000 results (0.32 seconds)

it's a risky move because people will probably post in internet threads about how whiny you are

it is practically impossible to find a GIF of Steven Tyler with the words "STEP OFF HATER" on it

but I can't imagine having such a low opinion of myself that I'd say "well! I suppose everyone wants to hear what I thought about this review that ran this morning, well here is my REBUTTAL!" the fuck. I like music criticism! the critic's job is not to understand you on your own terms, it's to report on how your attempt to communicate your vision came across

that's the way *you* would respond to criticism, sure--but that may or may not be the same angle that Fleet Foxes dude or Andy Falkous is coming from. FF could just be talkin shit on twitter for fun you know? And as others have said, this is the way Falkous comes across live, as a caustic bastard so why wouldn't he respond this way? totally agree that it's not the critics job to understand you on your own terms. . . but, i dunno, i've said this a bunch already but i think the FOTL post is hilarious.

wait, if FF dude is so caustic why does FF music sound like a wet lavender fart

FF could just be talkin shit on twitter for fun you know?

He's not actually in Fleet Foxes anymore, but yes, he's not doing it seriously at all. All of his interviews and public appearances have been affected/ridiculous.

Falkous is the caustic one, he's not in FF

he's in FOTL

*farts with lavender*

I'm talking about Tillman. Whose record is pretty damn good, and not very Fleet Foxes-y at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-JbfKF_x90

I'm not going to indict anybody but myself on this count but my "Saved to drafts" folder contains years of unsent
'responses to criticism', maybe ten total. I don't think it's pathetic or amateur or indicative of any failing on anybody's part to get butthurt about a shit review. xp

haha reading comprehension is not my friend today, apparently

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aGTEHc0v24

to be clear, in general responding to criticism is prob a bad idea, but if you're going to do it a) noting clearly whatever blatant inaccuracy cheesed you off, b) making clear you poop on the critic's head and c) shutting the fuck up after a & b is probably most likely to inspire lols and make the critic feel lame.

a) I agree b) blow me c)

I can only assume that ‘John Stossel’ is the kind of peculiarly North American reference that pervades the reviews which sit about websites of this type, acting as smug and impenetrable signifiers of absolutely nothing at all. I, the ‘author’, googled ‘Mr Stossel’ and can find no absolute evidence of a monopoly of commonsense on his part let alone any indication that he and I could agree that the term has any unified or even loosely defined meaning. I do, however, detect the ascribing to us of the safe, conservative values which are exhibited far more freely within your own work and again, applaud you for attempting to deal with your complicity and guilt in such a public forum.

I mean really

i mean you either think that is hilarious or you don't

(hint: it's hilarious)

I, a poster, found it "hilarious."

A+

constantly referencing how self-aware you are that you are doing something stupid actually makes it more stupid

jesus stop ascribing your conservative values on the rest of us, cad

i mean someone needs to take ian cohen down a notch but this was not the way

eh, it's just a ranty blog post. intermittently funny, but not funny enough. nbd in any event.

lol alfred

Did alfred just out cad as Jesus? wow.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51irMu%2B2WLL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

"not funny enough"--contenderizer

to be clear, in general responding to criticism is prob a bad idea, but if you're going to do it a) noting clearly whatever blatant inaccuracy cheesed you off, b) making clear you poop on the critic's head and c) shutting the fuck up after a & b is probably most likely to inspire lols and make the critic feel lame.

― da croupier, Thursday, May 31, 2012 3:59 PM (14 minutes ago) Bookmark

yeah but in this case i don't know why making Cohen feel lame should be a worthy goal. the gist of the review was basically "this guy is a genius but he's made better records" and the guy's response was to liken the reviewer's fandom to a vengeful ex stalking his high school sweetheart.

and i mean, the majority of the time you're reviewing a record by one of your favorite artists, it's probably not their masterpiece, so i kind of hate the idea of being on the receiving end of a rant like that from one of my heroes just because i wrote "i love this guy but this album, not so much"

well, look at the comments: fanboys who think like Metacritic programmers.

constantly referencing how self-aware you are that you are doing something stupid actually makes it more stupid

IAWTC