pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

I just thought it was funny for this to be the one time a Pfork review dutifully runs thru an artist’s controversies, only this time to spin it into a positive (“She marches to the beat of her own drum!”).

And it’s in keeping with the review in general, which indeed could have used some editing.

In my defense I don’t think I’ve ever made it through a full episode of Cum Town

I agree with Whiney about the Tyler review.

Mise-en-scène is colonialist

The Tyler isn’t a review it’s a knee jerk release response piece which I think is part of what makes it jarring — it hits this breezy on-first-listen tone but it’s gesturing at unpacking a really complex thing

And it’s in keeping with the review in general, which indeed could have used some editing.

― we don't have to be around all these coffee shops (morrisp), Saturday, June 26, 2021 1:14 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

What do you guys mean by this

I meant I found it difficult to read on a sentence level, e.g.:

Her hyponasal vocal switch-ups—including the deployment of a nonspecific African accent (likely inspired by her own heritage) in “Woman” on Planet Her and “Got to Town” off of Amala aren’t theft, but rather evidence of her chameleonic, limitless flows and intonations.

But Planet Her’s true standouts draw on the same cinematic, life-affirming spirit that propelled Hot Pink’s “Bottom Bitch”: The harpsichord-assisted digicore of “Payday,” ft. Young Thug; the uniquely Black girl celebration of life contained in “Get Into It (Yuh)” as it encapsulates the two seconds that preempt twerking—the pre-leg kick—while Doja rattles off the prerequisites to “get into it.” (“And if she ain’t she got a butt, fuck it, get into it, yuh.”)

Idk, it's not a big deal, I just had to read it twice to feel like I got what was being said and it's not like a super sophisticated analysis

xp -- with the doja cat song I think the criticism is less about the song per se and more about hanging out in a chat with white supremacists

That review opens by saying it is *good* that she is an “edgelord” because it overturns stereotypes. (“Not showing penitence for her audience!”) Really has nothing to do with the music—she is being evaluated as a performance artist, based on how well she teases out the contradictions in the semiotics of race. This kind of review feels really arbitrary. One person’s progressive gesture is another person’s problematic one—you could really spin most things both ways given the lack of agreed upon standards.

It’s a very strange text. She is being spoken of as a kind of heroic figure due to a series of messy controversies last year. But the claims are always couched in kind of passive language so it’s hard to really nail down why the reviewer seems to feel this way.

Whether it’s using of the f-slur in her apology for using the f-slur or her perceived indifference following a “showing feet in racial chatrooms” brouhaha, Doja isn’t ensnared by the predictability of pop stardom.

Cool?

Some artists release albums that function as grand gestures, but Doja Cat doesn’t have to; Planet Her is an enormous shrug, the edgelord hottie pop star telling the world that it’s not her job to care.

If the reviewer flat out said they appreciated doja because she was an anti-pc bomb-thrower, standing up to sanctimony, that would at least be coherent. But the review never quite goes there.

I don’t think you and I read the same review. (I do agree with Rob’s critique though)

That review opens by saying it is *good* that she is an “edgelord” because it overturns stereotypes.

For example. The review does not actually say this at all

Ah, yes, the classic “triple threat” wherein three things described have competing values

“D-40 is a triple threat: He’s a great ILX poster, a knowledgeable rap snob, and he lacks reading comprehension”

Weird that there’s total confusion and disagreement about what this lede is supposed to say

Anyway, D-40 is right that it doesn’t need editing

On the surface, she resembles an e-girl making fart jokes who’d peak at 70,000 Twitter followers more than a masterful, total-package artist. Or the intensely hermetic version of that: a popular, anonymous forum shitposter everyone assumes is a man because the assumption is women—Black women, especially—mobilize against offense instead of causing it.

She communicates like an anonymous 4chan troll, *but* she is a Black woman, which violates our expectations.

It seems like she is being commended for bucking stereotypes, even in this kind of uninspiring way of emulating internet trolls. But you’re right deej, the review doesn’t explicitly say this is praiseworthy. I think that is because it would be hard to directly make the case that her antics are good, or serve her work in any meaningful way. Easier to just create a vague impression of rebelliousness, bucking expectations.

I just think it reads like a college reviewer, who thinks their favorite artist can do no wrong, resorting to hyperbole and “this-is-good-actually.”

What editor doesn’t read “limitless flows and intonations”; circle “limitless” in red pen; and write a question mark next to it.

I think the reviewer likes doja cat’s flirtations with nihilism and internet shock aesthetics but doesn’t want to articulate why they like these things.

i remember reading the first paragraph or two of that doja cat review and thinking "yeah ilx is gonna rip this thing to shreds"

weirdly enough I listened to a few tracks from the record and got bored of it, but I *love* hot pink. one of the defining mainstream pop albums of the past few years imo

“ It seems like she is being commended for bucking stereotypes”

No it doesn’t. It reads as a totally neutral description of these things — you’re projecting

Anyway, D-40 is right that it doesn’t need editing

― bruce spr!ngisH3r3 on broadway (Whiney G. Weingarten), Saturday, June 26, 2021 8:53 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

I said that Rob’s critiques were correct. Don’t put words in my mouth defending indefensible treeship posts

I just think it reads like a college reviewer, who thinks their favorite artist can do no wrong, resorting to hyperbole and “this-is-good-actually.”

What editor doesn’t read “limitless flows and intonations”; circle “limitless” in red pen; and write a question mark next to it.

― we don't have to be around all these coffee shops (morrisp), Saturday, June 26, 2021 9:28 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

I have issues with the piece but don’t really get this tone from the piece at all. If anything from a musical perspective it’s kind of reserved and I wish it grappled with it a bit more, was a bit less measured or detached — but the idea that it’s some hyperbolic stan type article feels incredibly off base to me.

Her attitude feels perfectly calibrated for a burnout generation. Some artists release albums that function as grand gestures, but Doja Cat doesn’t have to; Planet Her is an enormous shrug, the edgelord hottie pop star telling the world that it’s not her job to care.

the virtue of the album is said to be its dgaf attitude. throughout the piece, she provides examples of ways in which this is the case, including doja working with doctor luke and posting online in an "edgelord"-y manner.

this is the key theme of the review: people doja to care, and she never does. she is a pop star who exists above (or below?) the fray of a culture that is always making moral and political demands of her.

i am not going to assent to this alternative, deejconstructive reading.

*people expect

I didn't get deep into the review, but the phrase "triple threat" signals "someone who is good at three things," which isn't a neutral reading at all, especially in the world of pop music and entertainment, who literally give awards for such people

https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/950804/lea-michele-to-receive-billboards-first-ever-triple-threat-award-at-women-in

http://armyofselenagomez.com/news/30473/

https://people.com/awards/jennifer-lopez-at-the-people-magazine-awards-wins-triple-threat-award/

I suppose, technically, a case COULD be made that "This person is exceptional at three things: Just stating facts, not implying that that is a good or bad thing," but that betrays both the phrase's origins in sports AND the contemporary use as an award given to pop stars

And also pointing out "Black women [are expected to] mobilize against offense instead of causing it" in the lede is either A) Like treeship says, explicitly praising the convention-breaking antics of things like showing the feeties to the Pepes or B) Making a grand and valid point about black women in the internet sphere, but awkwardly shoehorned into a lede to a record review that just got done laying out all the things this artist is exceptional at.

If it's A it betrays the stance that P4k have been taking of dinging artists like X and the Wipers and Tyler and Belle and Sebastian for not understanding/incorrectly navigating contemporary attitudes towards American racism. If it's B it's just bad editing because it certainly made it look like A.

In conclusion, 4chan is where Doja Cat is a viking

You guys are being very weird. I was responding specifically to the quoted portion in the post, not the entire review, the part that begins “on the surface” and ends “…instead of causing it.”

“Her attitude feels perfectly calibrated for a burnout generation. Some artists release albums that function as grand gestures, but Doja Cat doesn’t have to; Planet Her is an enormous shrug, the edgelord hottie pop star telling the world that it’s not her job to care.”
the virtue of the album is said to be its dgaf attitude. throughout the piece, she provides examples of ways in which this is the case, including doja working with doctor luke and posting online in an "edgelord"-y manner.

― treeship., Sunday, June 27, 2021 2:36 PM (thirty minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

This quote, on the other hand, is an accurate, neutral description of the album. You’re suggesting that her assessment that it’s “perfectly” calibrated is hyperbole intended to pump up the critical value of the album; I maintain it’s an assessment of the artist’s affect, suggesting that there’s a clarity of signification

If we want to talk about the “triple threat” thing, I don’t really get the problem with saying pop star, edgelord, and hottie, though I guess you *could* critique by saying edgelord and hottie fall under the pop star umbrella I think it’s more accurate to say a star encompasses a pop star, and edgelord, and a hottie. Don’t really get the issue with that at all

this is the paragraph that comes right before it:

But while SZA’s words ripple with angst, Doja is unconcerned. She exceeds the mark without ever appearing like she’s trying. She’s an underachieving overachiever, singing the lines to “Imagine” (“Imagine, imagine, put the studio in the mansion”) like she took a muscle relaxant.

right here, her understated affect as a singer is said to be good. if it is not necessarily superior to sza's "angst," it is at least a salutary correction to this tendency.

then the writer pivots to claim that the album itself sort of holds back from being a "grand gesture." the understatement isn't only in the vocal performance or the music itself, but in how the album is positioned in the arc of the artist's career. this is also seen to be good; as you said, there is a "clarity of signification" here between what the album sounds like and what it means.

also in this sentence, the writer returns to the phrase "edgelord hottie pop star," referencing once again the way she "doesn't care" about what the world thinks about her hanging out with alt right trolls, or whatever. what this adds up to is an impression that doja is cool because she doesn't "take the bait" of the culture, or conform to expectations. and this is interesting because it does seem to contradict pitchfork's messaging in other articles.

unrelatedly, i don't think it's convincing. nothing in the review made me think that doja cat seemed like a cool or interesting rebel who is expressing something meaningful about her own "burnout" generation.

but that is secondary. the point is that nothing about how the article is put together suggests that the writer is simply neutrally observing that doja is a bit of a troll and dropping it. they make this point central to the discussion of her. it is right in the beginning -- part of her "triple threat"

Gary Glitter is a triple threat: Pop star, fashion icon and convicted pedophile

If it's A it betrays the stance that P4k have been taking of dinging artists like X and the Wipers and Tyler and Belle and Sebastian for not understanding/incorrectly navigating contemporary attitudes towards American racism. If it's B it's just bad editing because it certainly made it look like A.

― bruce spr!ngisH3r3 on broadway (Whiney G. Weingarten), Sunday, June 27, 2021 2:58 PM (thirty-two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

When did Pitchfork diss the Wipers this way? I checked the archive, and their only Wipers coverage in the past few years was a few things about Youth of America (a Sunday review and spots on their '80s album list and top 50 PNW punk albums list) and all were totally positive.

The Wipers Sunday review took them to task for their white privilege

I must have missed that one. I guess I never thought of sage’s consistent doomerism as white privilege, but I suppose it is a manifestation of it

You could read it that way. I was scanning for explcit mentions of race or similar, of which there are none. Just a really dumb opening paragraph about Sage's use of the phrase "no fair".

Gary Glitter is a triple threat: Pop star, fashion icon and convicted pedophile

citation needed

“right here, her understated affect as a singer is said to be good. if it is not necessarily superior to sza's "angst," it is at least a salutary correction to this tendency.”

You keep, over and over, making this same jump. What on earth makes you think it’s considered a “salutatory correction” instead of just a point of contrast ?

Gary Glitter is a triple threat: Pop star, fashion icon and convicted pedophile

― bruce spr!ngisH3r3 on broadway (Whiney G. Weingarten), Sunday, June 27, 2021 3:33 PM (fifty-one minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

You of all people—Eminem fan, dirtbag left defender— should recognize that edgelord and pedophile are not parallel, that edgelord is a pose and not a like, ideological commitment (it tends to have certain ideology commitments associate with it which we all might dismiss as “edgelord bullshit” but the concept itself is more a cultural stance than anything still)

It is a point of contrast that works in the song. That is interesting to observe, for the reviewer. And which ties into various elements of her public persona that are also implied to be good because this is a positive review of an album not a 5th grade book report.

The reviewer closes the article by saying that, in the album, doja is “telling the world that it is not her job to care,” a pose that is “perfectly calibrated for the burnout generation.”

It does not say that doja seems to believe it isn’t her job to care, and may be wrong, or that time will tell whether her calculated aloofness will resonate with her audience.

If there is any ambiguity, it lies in the fact that the reviewer doesn’t explain why she finds doja cat’s seeming carelessness compelling.

The article just unconvincingly asserts that this album is a triumph for doja cat against the haters and a victory for the “burnout generation.”

I don’t want to come down too hard on this particular writer. Pitchfork often publishes criticism like this.

An album is discussed in the context of some hazy cultural narrative that might feel vaguely familiar but only really exists, in this particular form, in the reviewer’s head, and then the album is assessed on how well it navigated the choppy waters of this meta-environment. These pieces often seem like post-facto defenses of music the author happens to like—like they need to find a way to say that it is also making a meaningful contribution to the discourse.

This imperfect review is better written than any of your posts itt

written more better, you mean. goodly