Half a decade or more ago, I'd agree with that, but their writing has vastly improved in the past few years. It's still stylized somewhat and obviously they're appealing to a particular crowd, but the reviews have gotten a lot more relevant and some of the articles are actually really interesting.

That's the thing... for all the talk I hear about people like that, I don't think I've ever actually met one. Anyone I've ever come across who's even given a s--t about the subject has said something more along the lines of:

Which is why Pitchfork hate (actually a lot of "hipster" hate in general) kind of strikes me as the worst sort of elitism: the presumption of some kind of automaton, trend-slave culture spoken as though the speaker were above it all. That's sort of the thing about culture--it's inevitable, we're all part of it, it just manifests differently for different people.

I dunno. I'm not accusing anyone of that (at least not anyone here--I can think of some people I know in the so-called real world)--just musing aloud (or in text, I suppose).

I just want a album review to be entertaining.

I couldn't give a flying fuck whether they like the album or not.
That's for me to decide.

That's all correct. But in the light of "culture manifestation": I think that people tend to divide culture into The Good, The Bad, and The Unknown.

For example, I am a Metal-head. Most people nowadays would synonimize that with low-grade "metal" bands such as Bullet for My Valentine or Avenged Sevenfold. I notice that in the Metal Community we tend to have this sense that our culture is superior to say, the Indie Culture or the Scene. I, personally, have no problem with Indie Music. I think it's great, but the Scene, I think Metal has more to offer musically and intellectually.

In Punk, it's "We're better than Pop or Mainstream."

What I'm trying to say is that groups of individuals involved in different cultures tend to believe that their way of life is the best. That their music, clothing, ideas, religion-or lack thereof, and attitudes are better than everyone else.

The writers for Pitchfork are just buying into the Anti-Trendwhore movement. Which is ironic because some of those writers on the site aren't exactly known for an impeccable taste in music or culture either.

To bad you cant tell that to the gillion pitchfork readers who read there review so that they know if its acceptable to like an album or not. Hell even some of my friends do that, they will deny it but I know they take other peoples (especially PF) review as an extension of there own opinion.

Those people just kinda don't exist, sorry.

Also their*

:laughing:

You'll always have people who follow x blindly. Doesn't matter what. Like Hitler!

Why not just read Klosterman?

Exactly. All I ask of a reviewer is a clear indication of where they're coming from so I have a reasonable idea of whether I would like the album or not regardless of how they rated it. Pitchfork is actually a pretty good example of this: we all know where they're coming from opinion-wise so it works as a good barometer for their individual reviews.

Pitchfork: Album Reviews: Louis XIV: The Best Little Secrets Are Kept

:rofl::rofl:

"fuck you, bitch. I'm a fuck machine with only one speed: fuck."