So, let's say you're one of the Black Kids.
You're from Jacksonville, Florida, which already sucks. I mean, ok, I guess you might get to see NFL bust Matt Jones walking around all white and beardy, but otherwise, gross. But anyway, you and your friends form a band, self-release a mediocre EP, and within minutes you're officially the Next Big Thing, as evidenced by constant, drooling coverage from NME and Pitchfork and the like.
So, you get a record deal, and you put out a record. And then THIS happens:
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/51246-black-kids-partie-traumatic
Yeah...those guys who loved you and hyped you up and pretty much guaranteed good things from you? They won't even deign to write a SINGLE SENTENCE about your record. Because, meh, sorry, didn't you know Fleet Foxes are the tits now?
And what does that "sorry" imply, anyway? "Sorry, readers, that we kept talking about this shitty band for 6 months and now have to admit that they're shitty"? Or "Sorry, Black Kids, but your check didn't clear"?
Or is it just a simple declarative statement: "This is some sorry, sorry shit."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I'm guessing it's meant to be interpreted in the many ways you described.
What's interesting, though, is that the use of a photo makes the review much less of an "opinion of one reviewer" and seem much more like the corporation of Pitchfork speaking to the readers. Or at least Scott Plagenhoef making a symbolic gesture about the role Pitchfork played in hyping the Kids up with no talk of music for those not fresh on the scene. Pitchfork needs ad revenue and must maintain their image, though. Maybe we should devote a blogpost or two to getting to the core of Who Pitchfork is serving. And look at the way in which they attempt to play to those readers through their manipulation of News, Reviews, and Editorials. Ugh. Sounds like a brilliant Media Studies Term Paper, but maybe too big of a bite for us working blokes to swallow. Ah well.
Back to Black Kids: not surprisingly Metacritic polls at 6.4 with a whole lot of okay sounding reviews, which makes Pitchfork's slam even more mysterious and, dare I mention the word, SUSPECT. Duhn duhn duhn.
But then again, maybe I should spend the amount of time I would spend reading a review, and think about the symbolism of the two Pugs. Maybe there's more meaning to this review than we think! duhn duhn duhn.
Oh you're just jealous because you're a White Adult.
Post a Comment