How now brown cow!!!

http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/mu.../pitchfork.jpg

Any list that contains "Welcome to the Jungle" is bad in my book.

It was nice to see some love for "Life in a Glass House" though.

There's alot of good and bad in that list but, hey... it's pitchfork.

for heaven's sake. it's just another body of opinion, and one that probably at any rate represents the alternative community in general a lot better than most other lists presently in existence (e.g. Rolling Stone etc). obviously nobody's going to agree with everything in it. that does NOT make it a 'shit list'.

Only an idiot would pay money for that. It pisses me off to think people will actually buy it.

Pitchfork
 

Never heard of it until I started here. It's a fairly ridiculous site, I can see why so few people hold their opinions with much gravity.

Pitchfork is unique in that it attempts to incorporate absolutely no objectivity in writing reviews. They are not the worst by a long shot -- but they are not a place I would look to find well-written or impartial reviews.

But that's simply not the case. The fact is that there is no other review site within the indie community at large whose opinions are held with MORE gravity. Pitchfork are extremely influential and, whether one loves them or hates them, there can be no absolutely understating their chiefly importance in terms of being arbiters of taste in the indie world at all.

I feel that's a large aspect of their appeal. They are simply SO partisan, SO dogged, SO elitist, SO cooler-and-indier-than-thou, that people began to feel the urge to be as "cool" as them and proceeded to fanatically cling to every opinion they ever put out. On the flipside, it is that exact same reason why they're so hated, AND why the people that hate them which such venom still check up on their latest review scores religiously - if for no other reason than to add additional fuel to their loathing.

Pitchfork is an instance of modern internet marketing at its very cleverest and finest. Spark controversy, fuel outrage, and you're bound to get attention.

I also think that a large number of indie sites on the web probably owe their very existence to Pitchfork.

Positive or otherwise, its impact on the alternative music world from an internet fan perspective is virtually unparalleled...imho.

Even if they made it the top million songs I would still bitch about it.

I'm in full agreement here. They're Indie's Rolling Stone. = /


True, but don't you find the whole thing kind of pathetic? Instead of seeking out things for themselves, people would rather have someone else (AKA Pitchfork or some other publication) put an opinion in their mouth, followed by brazenly wearing it on their sleeve as evidence that their taste is music is superior to someone elses. It's always been that way I know, but that's no excuse for folks to sit on their asses and rally behind crappy biases. I mean, Christ, where did the desire to learn and experience things for oneself disappear off to? Loving them or hating them isn't even worth the effort involved when you could be listening to something interesting instead.

And finally, I could care less how appealing their approach is to those who indulge themselves in this sort of trash: anyone who writes off King Crimson, ELP, and everything Yes did after Close to the Edge as "grotesque", yet acknowledges such groups' influences on the musicians they adore isn't worth piss in my book. :crazy: