Pitchfork's P2k: The Decade in Music

The Bright Eyes phenomenon, yes. Overpowering.

Reading Pitchfork has become like hate-sex.

Delete life.

fuck missy elliot and that shit song
Posted by: d@ve at 08/22/09 6:26 PM | Reply
Score = -1

pitchfork is nothing more than online journalism, as evidenced by the quality of its writers, its pervasive amount of lists and the choices that go into those lists. it should never claim to be more than that.
Posted by: mork at 08/22/09 5:32 PM | Reply
Score = 0

p4k = online journalism!!

These people can barely write.

how can anyone take this list seriously? jimmy eat world's "the middle" in the top 200 and only one pipettes song made the cut?!?!?!?!?!?!

the biggest crime, however, was the complete lack of songs from zwan.

Tegan and Sara, Metric, The Kills, Holly Miranda, The Jealous Girlfriends, Lykke Li, Alexisonfire, City and Colour, La Roux??
Where's all this good music?

No Zwan, no credibility. Honestly.

what's the 'online journalism' guy even trying to say?

Apparently "online journalism" is a pejorative! All online publications have bad writing and pointless lists!

kshighway it's gonna be okay i swear

everytime i click the "see all messages" thing i end up staying on this thread just so i can hear the will smith song to the end.

I hope so, Matt. I hope so.

Haven't read it yet, but Eric Harvey's piece, "The Social History of the MP3," is up.

http://pitchfork.com/features/articles/7689-the-social-history-of-the-mp3/

And here's one last Stereogum comment on the P2k tracks list:

I'm sorry. This list is ridiculous. And as someone that was actually reading Pitchfork waaaay back in 1996, I think their "we're-gonna-have-it-both-ways-just-to-show-you-we're-NOT-elitists" crap is sadly transparent.... Does anyone REALLY think the almost entirely image-driven R&B / hip-pop of this decade DESERVES the amount of mannered scrutiny and exaltation they give it??? Alongside the truly brilliant and moving music that's been made this decade?? A far more interesting list would've been the couple-hundred songs that will still matter 10 years from now.......
Posted by: Jason at 08/23/09 10:42 PM | Reply
Score = 0

everytime i click the "see all messages" thing i end up staying on this thread just so i can hear the will smith song to the end.

It's true, that song is bewitching.

I just finished reading Harvey's piece, and it blew me away. So, so good.

Quotes that stood out.

The insane:

By 2003, things had risen to the level that Orrin Hatch was grilling technology firms at Senate Judiciary Committee hearings about the possibility of "warning" copyright infringers, and then-- I'm not making this up-- destroying their computers. "If that's the only way," Hatch said, "then I'm all for destroying their machines. If you have a few hundred thousand of those, I think people would realize the seriousness of their actions."

So I'm not sad that print magazines, or newspapers, are dying; I'm sad that music criticism and journalism are endangered. I'm sad that publishers, advertisers, and corporate owners have lagged behind so incredibly long, holding onto an outdated critical model out of blind faith, leaving so many talented writers in the lurch. People expressing their musical taste to an eager audience in the offtime of their day jobs is one thing, and by all accounts a very good thing. But alongside these folks, we desperately need people to get paid to listen, discuss, contextualize, and critique music on a full-time basis. Until someone figures out how to make this work, a music culture will continue to take a significant hit. Print is dead: long live criticism.

He doesn't really make an argument as to WHY we need paid critics. WHY isn't it good enough that people are writing "in the offtime of their day jobs"? I agree with him affectively--it *feels* like people should be paid to be fulltime critics. But I don't see who is going to be paying them going forward.

Maybe that's his point.

Glad the "Stereogum comments are dumb" derailment is over.

WHY isn't it good enough that people are writing "in the offtime of their day jobs"?

Presumably because these people, while they may have good taste or be able to write decently, don't always have the practice, experience, and knowledge that full-time music critics do as a matter of course.

Glad the "Stereogum comments are dumb" derailment is over.

― 3 mods 1 banhammer (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Monday, August 24, 2009 9:49 AM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

seriously, shit is not that hilarious

xp That's a big generalization, of course (there are plenty of full-time critics who are idiots), but I think that's what he's getting at.

Yeah, I think you're right jaymc.

Still. . . Harvey himself isn't a fulltime critic, yet he still does really good work. Perhaps that is true despite the limitations imposed by his not being a fulltime critic, but I'm not sure that's true.

On Twitter, N4te P4tr1n linked to a great blog post by T0m Ew1ng, in which T0m writes:

The way Pitchfork, and I think most music sites/publications/sections work, is that when they identify a blindspot they look for someone who knows their stuff to write about it. Pitchfork in particular is actually very good at this: as I understand it, the reason it now employs writers who know about dance music, and pop, and hip-hop, and Afro-pop, and metal is that it used to get people going “WTF Pitchfork you know nothing about this stuff and it’s awesome”, and it said “OK, come and tell us about it.”

The whole (short) blog post is worth reading.

For whatever it's worth, Harvey is a grad student in Indiana University's Department of Communication and Culture, so it's not like he's a computer programmer blogging about Animal Collective on his lunch break.

Oh I know! I was just saying that he's not a fulltime *music critic*.

There's a lot of smart people who fall somewhere in between fulltime music critic and "computer programmer blogging about Animal Collective on his lunch break."

this is my last post on ILX for a while, guys.

Seriously?

Why?

miss u boo

(Sorry if that's an inside-joke I'm missing, WW. Haven't been able to keep up with the thread this morning. If you're serious, and because of time commitments, take care and come back. Otherwise, I hope you reconsider and stick around.)

(and it's because of . . . )

fuck that essay is long.

One would think the editors of a decent music publication would identify said "gaps" ahead of time, rather than wait for the world to laugh so loudly at their befuddlement that they're shamed into course-correction.

0tt, you really need to get over wasting so much of your time mindlessly hating on P4k.

Who doesn't remember the scathing UNESCO report, subsequent mass protests in Eastern Europe, and secret meeting between the Pope and Brent D that finally forced the site to cover Missy Elliott?

is mindlessly defending and championing P4k a more fulfilling way to spend so much of your time, brah? (xpost)

One would think the editors of a decent music publication would identify said "gaps" ahead of time, rather than wait for the world to laugh so loudly at their befuddlement that they're shamed into course-correction.

sure if you totally ignore the way the site (and most things btw) actually evolved over time.

Sh1pley, I figured someone was going to throw that one at me, but I didn't wait several months to log in just to post a mindless attack on P4k.

Here are some non-P4k threads I started recently:

Best Music Criticism of the 2000s
The Death of the Record Collection
Maintaining a Digital Music Collection

i'm just saying, you spend a lot of time laboring in the defense of something that imo doesn't need defending -- it's like if everytime made a disparaging comment about message boards or posting anonymously on the internet, you tried to truthbomb everyone with the fact that omg, we are all anonymously posting on an internet message board!!

Good point, and well said. I'll try to focus my energy here on other things from now on.

i suggest finding threads about silly CNN/Fox News bloopers and being all "you fools!!! where would we be without 24 hour news networks?! dead in a hole, I say!!!!"

Or leap to the defense of Sean Hannity on the "Worst FOX commentator" thread. Hannity is repeatedly maligned on this forum, and needs a good defender.

Or some other good example of a medium or media outlet with lots of good and bad points instead of one very divisive individual.

I wasn't being snarky. You're right, and I'm going to focus on other things from here on out than P4k-defending.

Seriously, I like Pitchfork, too. No reason not to defend it (at least from time-to-time).

The best-songs list has exposed me to a lot of stuff I hadn't focused on before, much of which I like. OutKast's stuff prior to Speakerboxxx/The Love Below is a good example (I realize I'm way behind the curve on appreciating OutKast). Anyway, for stuff like that, I'm thankful for P2k's list.

thank god kshighway will now be devoting more time to threads about mp3s & records

I know you weren't being snarky. If I had to wait for you to be snarky before I was snarky I'd never get anything done! xpost

kshighway, you need some juju hounds in your life

Should I just post in threads on individual records I'm into? Would focusing on music instead of music publications and over-generalized topics such as The-State-of-X make people dislike me less?

Short of quitting the board, what can I do to stop everyone from continually calling me out for what I'm guessing are hopefully just rookie mistakes naive young posters make?

post to my nels cline thread!

Should I just post in threads on individual records I'm into?

You can post in other places, but yes. Moar music plz.