Next Post Music Biz Hoping That Whitney Houston’s New Album Will Restore At Least A Little Honor To Its Doings

top

Buddyhead Sticks A Pitchfork In It

outkast452_1Apoplectic rock site Buddyhead has enlisted its writer Chip Norman to craft its official response, if you want to call it that, to Pitchfork’s rundown of the top 500 singles of the decade. Surprise: He hates it! A few choice terms from the piece: “a sycophantic hegemony”; “a time where every shitty animal band was not merely popular, but each its own little zoo-themed, techno Elvis”; “Vampire Weekend is not better than Pulp.” (OK, he’s right on that last point. But he’s wrong on pretty much everything else, especially his constant denigration of Kelly Clarkson. Dude, c’mon. Fight the real enemy.) And the first comment, instead of going with the old-school exclamation “FIRST111111!!” exhorts the killing of all hipsters, which, sigh.


Can we just say, at this point, that people who derisively use the term “hipsters” are even more predictable and annoying than the vague, amorphous mass of whiteness that they claim to be against? Because a) the term “hipster” has really come to mean “a person whose tastes make me feel sorta-insecure about the righteousness of mine, even if I don’t want to admit it”; and b) MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MAKING FUN OF “HIPSTERS” ARE “HIPSTERS” THEMSELVES. I know, it’s some “enemy of my enemy is my friend” logical mindfuckery going on right there, but if you think about it for more than half a second, it’s the truth: The internecine squabbling about which bands are better; the making fun of fashion; the separating of people into “lemmings” and “cool people”—who’s guilty of that, exactly? Is it the people who are called hipsters, or is it the people who are arguing against them? Or is it both? Or everyone? (There’s a reason that Heathers resonates enough for it to be turned into a TV show after all these years, even if said reasoning is probably going to result in something pretty dreadful.)


I mean, give Buddyhead credit for something: Its stinky blotch of Internet puke got its head honchos some extra Beastie Boys ad revenue. It’s already garnered 55-plus responses on a slow-ass August day when the possibility of a Kings Of Leon remix album seems like it might have a drop of “newsworthiness” to wring from it. But next time you’re going to take a list to task for being something that offends your sensibility, it might help to have an argument more coherent than “lol I don’t get LCD Soundsystem, are they like Sufjan? Klosterman!! NERDY GLASSES?!?” And if you’re going to cite a publication’s “credibility falling down like [a very unpleasant and pretty misogynist image],” you may not want to use a review from the late ’90s as part of your salvo, because your message? Turns out to sound a hell of a lot like the “lol pitchfork sucks” sounds you made back in the day.


Oh, and one last thing: You would probably be taken more seriously if you took the time out from your “rant” to at least spell “Britney Spears” correctly. It’s called Google, dude. She’s pretty findable there.


Lil Wayne 2000: Pitchfork Snorts A Decade [Buddyhead]

 
By Maura at 1:00 PM on Thu Aug 27 2009
Posted to:
  • The concept of "hipster" was invented by the indie kids in an attempt to cover their/our intense self-loathing.
  • Weezy F Baby
    @BradNelson: Brad Nelson, you are my second favorite Nevada native (me being #1, duh)
  • Bruno The Fishing Dog is OTM.

    So much of the anti-"hipster" humor I see is just so weak! I, of all people, would love for someone awesome to rise up and write a really funny and scathing critique of this particular culture, but so often it's either rooted in stereotypes that are years and years old, or it's so obviously written from a personal "everyone but me sucks" perspective that it becomes completely incoherent, thanks to "I'm cool but wait you're not" rhetoric like the examples pulled out by other commenters. Does that mean it's impossible since it's so sprawling? Maybe!

    (also willhackney is otm but shh, everyone likes arguing)
  • Bruno the Fishing Dog
    @willhackney: don't say that! it makes us look as silly as we actually are!
  • willhackney
    It seems obvious to me that, like most music lists, this one was created from the compiled lists of many writers. It was not a single editor's opinion. This explains very clearly why there are a lot of mainstream hits (everyone is familiar with them, so they're more likely to appear on individual lists) and artists that have historically been covered by Pitchfork a lot. So what is everyone so angry about? At best, you are disagreeing with a very loosely associated conglomeration of music writers from all over the US. There is no entity. 'Pitchfork' has no opinion. In fact, you can find countless instances of Pitchfork writers having totally opposite opinions of the same band.
  • krisskraft
    @slowburn: I don't think they are, which is why I used the word "supposed"...hipster. (that's for you @BradNelson)
  • Kate Richardson
    I'm ok with bland if Bat for Lashes and Charlotte Hatherley are "ultra-bland."
  • The most telling section in the Buddyhead article is this:

    "Are we meant to believe that the cultural import for the last ten years of music should be found best in homecoming dances and THE MIX one-oh-whatever radio stations? A trip to the goddamn prom? Is that where hip independent music is finding its zenith? Does that mean overly-saturated, obnoxious, retarded-shade-wearing, major label, unit-moving, HIT MAKERS are the new indie? I’m not sure if that’s more legitimate than the old indie or not, but it’s definitely as wack as your Kid A review."

    So this guy hates popular music, LCD Soundsystem, AND Radiohead? His anger over major labels, hit makers and other strawmen peg him as the kind of guy who breaks into tears when subscription inserts fall out of a magazine.
  • NeverEnough
    I love R. Kelly whole-heartedly and unironically. And Buddyhead rules for describing Limp Bizkit's entire catalog as being "rape anthems". HA!
  • @krisskraft: Also, your opinions regarding R. Kelly contain warmed-over, banal, lowest common denominator bullshit. No other explanation.

    I'll be over here, enjoying my life and stepping in the name of love.
  • @krisskraft: Dude for a while there I was hoping you were going to work "hipster" into your every clause.
  • slowburn
    @krisskraft: If you think Pitchfork is "one of the supposed pillars of music journalism for our time," that goes a long, long, LOOONG way to explaining your other attitudes.

    Also, if you think "B.O.B." is a 7, not a 10, YOU need to explain that. Not Pitchfork.
  • Bruno the Fishing Dog
    @krisskraft: i'm sorry that you missed this thread - http://idolator.com/5266392/pitchfork-counts-do...

    but one thing i won't do is applaud buddyhead's shitheaded bear-baiting. it doesn't take a genius to see the flaws in pitchfork's list. i don't need to stoop that low to find common ground.

    of course we all know what a hipster is. the problem is that you're just as likely to find someone who matches that definition applauding buddyhead's sub-junior high rage as you are listening to animal collective or awkwardly dancing to mainstream hip-hop. it's a nebulous, worthless definition that has more to do with the glasses someone is wearing than the music they like. "hipster" can represent anything you want it to. when you're crucifying the same cultural phenomenon for A.) liking Jesu, but not getting the deep current of influence Justin Broadrick has had on metal, B.) "ironically" enjoying Beyonce and C.) liking "bands no one has heard of" just to be "elitist" then you haven't really defined anything at all.
  • krisskraft
    Can we all stop pretending that we don't know what someone means when they use the word "hipster"? It's like we have a bunch of hipster apologists on this thread, getting all defensive for the sake of the hipster nation.

    The Pitchfork list sucked because it lacked context and it inaccurately profiled the decade. There was no explanation on how the list was selected or what "Top" meant. Subjective is fine for individual folks, but we're talking about one of the supposed pillars of music journalism for our time.

    And why make the distinction of "Top Tracks" when you're going to put a Wolf Eyes track on the list? Was I not at the meeting when this one particular Wolf Eyes track was deemed the consensus hit that everyone adores? Completely arbitrary. The list read like someone laying out specific CDs on their coffee table before guests arrive. "Look at us and what we like and be impressed by our calculated contrarianism!"

    The list is also very biased towards the East Coast and UK, but I suppose Pitchfork is as well.

    The Buddyhead article might be reactionary, but it might be necessary too. We're in a depressing musical drought right now and someone has to start kicking back against the bland, soft-rock and progressive wanking that is feted as genius these days. The list just wasn't that exciting.

    And "B.O.B." isn't amazing, it's a 7, not a 10.
  • Bruno the Fishing Dog
    this was a choice comment, from way down on the first page:

    "You wanna argue that the Duke Spirit is better than Outkast, go right ahead, but what’s the fucking point?"
  • chachwitablog
    @krisskraft: The only real difference between "You are not alone"/"I believe I can fly" and "(Another song) all over again"/"losing my way"/"until the end of time" (or, you know, half of "Justified" or three-quarters of any NSync album) is that no one cares about the JT songs enough to hate on them.

    Anyway, Kisskraft, you're making a pure subjective call with saying JT > R Kelly. And it's totally beside the point - this buddyhead article kinda f**king blows. At no point does it explain why BOB isn't amazing ("white guilt" isn't a reason).

    "Well, ultimately taste is always in the eye of the beholder, but amongst aficionados I tend to assume that the distinctions between the good and bad are fairly clear cut (Michael Jackson vs. (and sorry for the double dip) Rick Astley?) One is obviously better than the other, no?"
    -Um, yeah, and there is a fair consensus that despite his flaws and missteps, R. Kelly has made some great music. Same goes for JT and, at least for one song, Kelly Clarkson.

    I feel like you're a "JT-loving hipster" calling out "Kelly Clarkson-loving hipsters." They're both bubblegum that pitchfork happens to like. What does that have to do with Maura's calling-out of hipster haters?

    I think the point is that hipsters suck, but people who hate hipsters actually are hipsters, and in fact we're ALL hipsters or non-hipsters or hey guess what it doesn't matter let's just talk about the music we like. I don't want to be labeled because I happen to love Outkast or "since u been gone." F**k labels.
  • Bruno the Fishing Dog
    @iantenna: well, that is about the LEAST accurate assessment of Daniel Johnston i've ever read.

    spot-on with Wesley Willis, may he rest in peace.
  • krisskraft
    @iantenna @pdfreeman: Thanks! I'm glad I'm not the only one here that is perplexed by R. Kelly's unnecessary elevation to the status of credible and talented musician.

    But, yeah, if you like R. Kelly, you are somehow enthralled with the spectacular insanity of a hack or you enjoy warmed-over, banal, lowest common denominator R&B music. No other explanation. But, both are surely valid reasons to like his music.
  • slowburn
    @Maura: Bingo.

    @iantenna: I'd never argue that Kells is any kind of sane, in fact I believe he needs to be in jail. But that's irrelevant to the question of whether he has talent, and whether he's produced good songs. Of course he's produced plenty of schlock (don't try to tell me that Justin, and N'Sync, have made all classics), but his phrasing is fantastic and he has challenged the limits of R&B. If "Ignition (Remix)" or "I'm a Flirt" don't make you move your ass, then nothing will.

    I can't believe I'm spending all this time defending Kells. Where's Kelefa Sannah when you need him?
  • retriddims
    The real issue I had with the Buddyhead screed was the writer's incapacity to comprehend anything outside of the punk/indie (not to mention white) canon possibly deserving critical merit. And that putting Kelly Clarkson, Justin Timberlake, or whoever on this list MUST be some kind of farce/ironic hipster posturing.

    According to him, we should all be listening to Johnny Cash?!
  • @slowburn: seriously? that was about the most accurate assessment of r. kelly i've read. he IS the wesley willis and daniel johnston of maintream r&b. a trainwreck who probably needs serious psychiatric help but instead is surrounded by enablers who let him continue on his current path 'cause crazy sells.
  • I get the whole idiot savant/outsider-art allure of R. Kelly’s output, but he still wrote two of the worst songs of the 90’s: “You Are Not Alone” and “I Believe I Can Fly” (essentially the same song). And his more recent output is more comical than transcendent.

    Thank you. The presence of R. Kelly on any list of "best" anything is a source of utter bafflement to me. His repulsive personal life aside, the guy's music is awful; it's like he's on some quest to destroy all that was once great about R&B and soul music.
  • @slowburn: Well, what about the judging table of America's Best Dance Crew?
  • slowburn
    @krisskraft: "Outsider-art allure" of R. Kelly? You're simply not making any sense. What would R. be an outsider of, in a way, that, say, Justin Timberlake is not? And let's not get started on where Justin would be without Timbaland. We all know it's nowhere.
  • dusty vinyl
    The only thing I gained from the Pitchfork List was that Pitchfork Media must have shares in various ISPs. The amount of embedded media per page is some ort of post-modern joke.
  • krisskraft
    @slowburn: way way way way way way way way way way way way way way more talented.

    I get the whole idiot savant/outsider-art allure of R. Kelly's output, but he still wrote two of the worst songs of the 90's: "You Are Not Alone" and "I Believe I Can Fly" (essentially the same song). And his more recent output is more comical than transcendent.
  • krisskraft
    @Maura: Well, ultimately taste is always in the eye of the beholder, but amongst aficionados I tend to assume that the distinctions between the good and bad are fairly clear cut (Michael Jackson vs. (and sorry for the double dip) Rick Astley?) One is obviously better than the other, no?

    Ironically, more than any other genre, greatness in Pop music really comes down to innovation. Those who can really push the envelope musically while retaining that universal appeal are the real geniuses. Many times it's the people behind the scenes doing a lot of the work (Timbaland, Richard X, Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis, etc.) and often it's the combination of their work and the charisma of the performer.

    Mediocrity is the signpost to a weak artistic effort. Anybody can "write" a song, it's the select few that can really make it shine.

    (and yeah, can't say I love "Get Sexy", but their best stuff is still worthy of the highest praise)
  • slowburn
    @krisskraft: Justin Timberlake is more talented than R. Kelly?

    What planet are you from?
  • @Maura: Wait, wait, wait...and I'm being serious here, but that whole Coltrane review was/is real?
  • As relevant now as it was three years ago...

    Two Hipsters Angrily Call Each Other 'Hipster'

    The Onion: Two Hipsters Angrily Call Each Other 'Hipster'
  • @krisskraft: I totally disagree with you on Kelly, and I completely agree that quality is important! But when you get that granular, things are in the eye of the beholder, no? I mean, we're talking here about the difference between dismissing a genre outright because it's "weak" and making distinctions within said genre.

    (Also I'd hold off on any comparative Sugababes judgments for now since "Get Sexy" was so, so bad.)
  • krisskraft
    The derisive use of the term "hipster" is still valid. That human archetype has existed in various forms for a long time. It's our duty as evolved human beings to constantly mock their comical existence until they are expunged from society.

    And I completely understand the MO of this site, but seriously, Kelly Clarkson is really bad (her songs, her looks, her personality, her B- voice). When the post-modern switch was flipped at the beginning of this decade and indie/alterna-rockers were given a pass to acknowledge their love for Pop music people seemed to forget that quality was still a going concern. Propping up a Kelly Clarkson or an R. Kelly, not to mention ultra-bland atrocities such as Bat For Lashes or Charlotte Hatherley, only diminishes the true greatness of actual talented pop artists such as Justin Timberlake, Roisin Murphy, Rachel Stevens, or the Sugababes. By not distinguishing between the so-so and the so great, we create a platform for every two-bit studio creation to have some sort of credibility. There have been a lot of music wars fought to dissuade the public from accepting mediocrity; to prevent the Little River Bands and Rick Astleys and Backstreet Boys of the world from gaining anything near credibility or a legacy. We can like music from every genre, but we don't have to like everything that genre produces.

    Kelly Clarkson: BOOOO!!!!!!!

    And, I'm pretty sure the misspelling of Britney's name was for effect.
  • dude, buddyhead's still around?
  • Everybody hates something. Somebody hates everything.

    These are the gears that keep the internet running.
  • I mean basically? HIPSTERS DO NOT EXIST. Everyone is uncool. Especially me. We should all revel in it! And, I don't know, come up with real targets for our stupid Internet-based arguments.
  • @T. AKA Ricky Raw: What? You're misreading the placement of the quotes. The material inside the quotes = what gets swapped out for the noun in 99% of cases when people say "I hate hipsters." The word "hipster" is a completely meaningless vessel that does nothing but assert annoyance (and at least a nugget of insecurity) on the part of the person speaking it. Sorry if you're uncomfortable with that!
  • I'd also add that I like a lot of Buddyhead releases, so I give them some sort of bias there. 400 Blows' last record is the best punk rock record of probably the last 15 years, but Pitchfork has apparently never heard of them.
  • Ha! I had seriously just finished reading that, before heading here and seeing this post. Maybe I come to this site too much, but when it got to the Kelly Clarkson part, I was thinking "Man, Maura @ Idolator will definitely not agree with that".

    All in all, I thought the Buddyhead piece was hilarious, and that article is an example of the humor I go to that site to find. I kinda chuckled at every use of "Haagen Daz" or ice cream...although to be honest, I wasn't sure why I found that funny. But yeah, I agree about the "hipster" part you mention above, and I like your A and B explanations. I think I'm going to steal that, because as of now my only response to people that use that word was "Define Hipster. Yeah, that's what I thought!"
  • I respect your right to rant, but this part of the rant was just ridiculous:

    the term “hipster” has really come to mean “a person whose tastes make me feel sorta-insecure about the righteousness of mine, even if I don’t want to admit it”;


    That right there is one of the actual reasons people hate hipsters, this arrogrant idea that not only is their taste so superior to everyone else's, everyone else is SINCERELY BELIEVES THE SAME, IS JEALOUS OF THEIR SUPERIOR TASTES AND HAS A SECRET INFERIORITY COMPLEX AS A RESULT.

    What a self-serving narcissistic argument that was. Mind you, I don't like that Buddyhead article you linked to and also agree that hipsters have become too easy and cliched a target. But you aren't doing yourselves any favors with the whole "they only hate hipsters because they're secretly jealous of our (self-professed) superior cultural tastes." That imaginary reason totally feeds into and validates the REAL reason people hate hipsters.
  • Yow, that's some smackdown right there! And I agree with you entirely on the hipsters denigrating hipsters nonsense. If it's important to you that a band is 'cool' then you don't like music.
blog comments powered by Disqus