The Pipettes

(xpost x 2)

in a nutshell.

i thought they were a joke or something.

unfinishable.

"not so much retro as they are post-retro, the product of an age in which progression in pop music has all but been replaced by cultivation and fusion"

"That the Pipettes are doing Shangri-La's impersonations on stage is almost a moot point."

or

"The twist is meant to be that these three are sexually aggressive, have read their French feminism, own some riot grrrl records, and have distinct, unique personalities in a sort of Spice Girls way."

I could also swear that there was a line in the review early yesterday morning that has since been removed about how The Arcade Fire and Band of Horses should be playing arenas but have to settle for just being indie bands because there is no justice!!

Not a bad article, that, except they missed out the stripy French fisherman's jumper.

horrid

I actually think Pitchfork writing is pretty decent at times, and while I didn't express it (it was late and I was hoping others would start some discussion) the review should be a talking point because it 1) apologizes for faux-retro irony in the lamest possible terms, 2) gives them feminism shoutouts while glossing over the four boys who play the music, and 3) hilariously attempts to give indie-pop some kind of big-scheme importance or cultural weight.

And I know it's irrelevant outside the USA. Do you think that I care? Ignore the topic, brotha. It's easy, there are plenty more.

I find them trying for this big 60s girl group sound and getting it so badly wrong actually endearing (big crashing drums etc). If they'd been a faithful facsimile of their influences I doubt I'd find them anywhere NEAR as entertaining.

agreed

and there's nothing faux

ahem

or ironic

HAHAHA

about these aspects.

2.
a. Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: "Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated" Richard Kain.
b. An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity.

I mean, you could MAYBE argue that there was incongruity when SHA NA NA first appeared on the scene, but I would think retroisms have become established as fairly commonplace over the last couple of decades.

Maybe it's a sincere homage to the music/style they love, more likely it's a visual stunt to attract comments along the lines of "well aren't they cute." I don't know if I'd be more concerned about male fans who kinda got off on it, or those that didn't.

It wouldn't even be that bad a song if not for the obnoxious cheerleader-style shouting of the title. Am I supposed to take that any way other than as irony in 2006?

That the Pipettes are doing Shangri-La's impersonations on stage is almost a moot point.

That is an apology. That is what an apology sounds like. Whether it was necessary or not I don't really care, but he clearly wants to gloss over the fact that the Pipettes are pushing their image at least as hard as their songs.

The disappointing thing about the album is that the fellow from Go! Team is involved in the production. On paper I would really like to hear a bricabracolage skip hop girl group along the lines of the G!T but with, you know, songs and harmonies and stuff. But the way the record turned out is sooooo weedy.

Again, what is ironic about it?

I was making a crass rhetorical point, get over it. It's too hot in here...

INDIE

a proper pop group would have not got anything wrong. shiny shiny perfect facsimiles all the way

The Puppini Sisters. Why on earth were you watching ITV3?!