pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (9609 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 (fifteen 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 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

best e-mail address ever, eh starbar?

dudley, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Dead right sir. Power shandies all round to the geezer behind it eh?

Sarah, Wednesday, 3 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen 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 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

five 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 (nine 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 (nine years ago) Permalink

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

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

it's more that they used that as their _hook_

x-post

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

omg that is horrorshow

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

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

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

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

I'm more bothered by beck as impeccable influence

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

ugh, "impeccable influences" is really repulsive.

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

He was worked up?

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

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

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

richter scale is logarithmic xpost

but kudos nonetheless

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

wtf, wtf -- wtf? -- wtf!

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

the incorporation of JOKES

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

ya i saw that too... pretty lazy writing

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

joeks, bruv

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

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

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

I'm just glad you're writing regularly.

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

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

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

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

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

sorry I haven't trusted their tshirt lists since I spent an awkward summer trying to rock constantines and Clearlake shirts

nomar, Thursday, 25 May 2017 17:31 (two months ago) Permalink

lol

Karl Malone, Thursday, 25 May 2017 17:34 (two months ago) Permalink

ilm eoy shirt list usually more otm, except that year a sock won

President Keyes, Thursday, 25 May 2017 17:38 (two months ago) Permalink

lmao nomar

Spottie, Thursday, 25 May 2017 17:55 (two months ago) Permalink

Beyoncé T-shirts are $35?

grawlix (unperson), Thursday, 25 May 2017 18:11 (two months ago) Permalink

great synergy with the Peaks ad

http://i.imgur.com/o9h0taX.jpg

Jay Elettronica Viva (Whiney G. Weingarten), Thursday, 25 May 2017 18:38 (two months ago) Permalink

lana del rey is not in Twin Peaks whiney

Οὖτις, Thursday, 25 May 2017 18:39 (two months ago) Permalink

I just meant it looks like the cast of Twin Peaks is very concerned with these shirts

Jay Elettronica Viva (Whiney G. Weingarten), Thursday, 25 May 2017 18:40 (two months ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

“Creature Comfort”
Arcade Fire’s “Creature Comfort” Knows Its Own Importance

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Saturday, 17 June 2017 18:01 (one month ago) Permalink

That whole track review is based on a misreading of the lyrics:

The lyrical arena is where Arcade Fire have out-Arcade-Fired themselves, with the song humble-bragging at one point about Funeral preventing a fan’s suicide. There are specific moments of empathy here that ring true to how music can be the salve, like the line, “Some girls hate their bodies, stand in the mirror and wait for the feedback.” And their overflowing hearts are in the right places, amplifying the unspoken struggle over whether to go through with it in the chorus before Win Butler reasons, “Well if you’re not sure, better safe than sorry.” Inevitably, this song will stop someone from doing something rash. The problem is that Arcade Fire are pompous about knowing that, throwing their arms wide around the problem and presenting their own music as the solution. Bono on line one for you, Win.

That sounds horrible, but the verse in question is pretty clear that Funeral was going to help her kill herself, not prevent it:

Assisted suicide
She dreams about dying all the time
She told me she came so close
Filled up the bathtub and put on our first record

Not the worlds best lyrics but... That's a pretty weird reading of it.

Frederik B, Sunday, 18 June 2017 15:39 (one month ago) Permalink

Last night a BNM saved my life

President Keyes, Sunday, 18 June 2017 16:34 (one month ago) Permalink

wait 'til she hears Reflektor!

fits, Monday, 19 June 2017 21:22 (one month ago) Permalink

my least favorite band

nomar, Monday, 19 June 2017 21:26 (one month ago) Permalink

Are Pitchfork no longer updating their rss feeds?

Vernon Locke, Wednesday, 21 June 2017 02:46 (one month ago) Permalink

FWIW, 30 album reviews landed in my feed this morning.

Vernon Locke, Thursday, 22 June 2017 00:01 (one month ago) Permalink

three weeks pass...

i liked this piece on PSY and "Gangnam Style" http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/psys-gangnam-style-changed-pop-music-whether-you-like-it-or-not/

flappy bird, Thursday, 13 July 2017 17:02 (two weeks ago) Permalink

I liked a couple recent features also. Looks like things are turning around.

billstevejim, Saturday, 15 July 2017 05:34 (one week ago) Permalink

*goes to spotify and types in "diamond"*

gold in them thar hills!

mh, Tuesday, 25 July 2017 20:59 (three days ago) Permalink

#1 Diamonds and Pearls lol

Chocolate-covered gummy bears? Not ruling those lil' guys out. (ulysses), Tuesday, 25 July 2017 21:56 (three days ago) Permalink

In the intervening decades of empowered female pop stars—from Millie Jackson to Madonna, Lil’ Kim to Rihanna—has any one of them baldly put their bikini-clad camel toe front and center on an album as Costa did back in 1973?

https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_COPk7dnIPKU%2FSXhYo7-3nOI%2FAAAAAAAAAJs%2FafGSaw5yTzo%2Fs320%2Fkim.jpg&f=1

Οὖτις, Wednesday, 26 July 2017 16:51 (two days ago) Permalink

I don't know, I don't think that invalidates the point at all? For reference:
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/41KBHS4ANQL.jpg

Though really going into detail in this discussion would get very awkward very rapidly.

Frederik B, Wednesday, 26 July 2017 17:07 (two days ago) Permalink

itt dudes discuss the history of the musical coochshot

this iphone speaks many languages (DJP), Wednesday, 26 July 2017 17:14 (two days ago) Permalink


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