Pitchfork review
 

For those of you concerned with such things here's pitchfork's shockingly poorly written (Petrusch and Screiber may be the only decent writers they have) 9 review, I give it a 1.6 (the review, not the album).

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/articl.../Damien_Rice_9

well they gave it 1.9, they hate him anyway so it was to be expected! Pitchfork have an agenda, bastards!

Wow! A guy that writes as horribly as he does has the nerve to attempt to belittle Damien? That read like it was written by a third grader at best.

I do find it interesting that pitchfork tends to speak with one voice when it comes to acts. Surely someone on their staff must think Damien doesn't stink, much the same way someone there must hate Arcade Fire.

Pitchfork is great for news and if they do give something (that isn't hip hop or pop which just smacks of tokenism when they like it) a good review I'll at least investigate the act but my god they're up their own arses when it comes to prose.

Doesn't matter how well or poorly he writes he'd entitled to his opinion. I just find it odd that THE indie website gives gigs to such bad writers considering the influence it has.

The Funeral review there signifies everything that is great and terrible about that site. Shining light on before then little known but astonishingly brilliant music but containing such awful writing it's almost unreadable.

While I agree he is entitled to his own opinion, I feel if you're going to slam somebody's writing abilities then your abilities better be on point. That's just my opinion. :)

he is entitled to his own opinion but they favour certain bands, that's what I don't like

I kinda like it, the satirical tone is well written and funny, even though I don't have to agree with the content (cos I like the album).

:smiley36:

Damien Rice fans are mostly stiff, humourless creeps. :smiley4:

Why? I call it brave and unconventional, it's called "diversity" if you hand out things like that to writers with different opinions and don't mind when you're the chief editor. It shows that you're not an egomanic fascist. Know what I mean?

It's not so much the differing opinions that bothers people about it though, it's the standard of english. Let them think what they want, becuase we're all entitled to that. The real question is though, why is it so necessary for this Marc Hogan chap to air his opinions with such a glaring lack of objective reasoning?

Diversity is one thing, but to absolutely pack an article with smart-ass comments, and absolutely no lucid or well-researched points is an insult to the reader.

Not that it'll do us much good moaning about it here, there's not much of a shock in the members of a Damien Rice forum complaining about a poorly written review of a Damien Rice album.

You mean ones that they like?

I stopped reading after the third paragraph. What the **** is this guy on. It's as if some prepubescent emo has wrote a ****ty article, passed it through a theosaurus and picked every big world humanly possible and then **** on the page. Jeez...

But he doesn't like Damien Rice and if he's the one who has to write a review about it, he's entitled to put as much polemic into it as he wants to. Okay, you could say, after that he's got a problem with being taken seriously, but to me the review has given many reasons why the cd is crap for the writer. Sure, they are cheeky and we don't agree with the content, but they are reasons. And he's also elaborated on the music itself. So one has an imagination what the album could sound like.
Most Scheisse reviews don't even mention the music on the album!

i fooking hate pitchfork. i agree they agree too much about who's hot and who's not, it's just not credible. fok'em. worst thing is, most of the danish music press seem to just reprint anything that's written on pf. if pf says it's gold, not poo, then it must be gold. hallelujah.

(and I haven't read the review linked above, just felt like spreading some... bitterness. plenty of that to go round.)

well, pitchfork reviews have always been like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get. besides i doubt they'll ever like damo again, he's so mainstream ya know

^actually i think it's pretty easy to figure out what they will like.

^ yeah, it's all about the james blunt love

you might wanna add icons to that to imply you are kidding
;)

but you know i am

^congratulations on your 3555th post!

yeah but maybe wheels would have some doubts..

ahh memorable number, thanks. only 7186 posts away from your mark

i don't think it's badly written, i think it's fairly well written.
And whilst i completely and utterly disagree with every single point he makes, and I personally don't think he understands remotely what Damien is about, he's perfectly as entitled to his oppinion as anyone who wirtes a review praising 9.

:)

There's a difference between prose and verse.

Yeah it wasn't that bad.

It's not just a badly written review it's an absolutely horribly written review!

This guy is so in love with trying to chock every sentence full with pseudo-clever put downs and unfavorable comparisons, that it renders his given point barely intelligible. Run on setences, runaway multi-parentheticals, and a "throw grammar and punctuation to the wind" style all based around a snarky ad hominem approach. Comes off as sour grapes about Damo's success being created on his own terms. God forbid someone Pitchfork never endorsed win the Mercury Prize.

Sure, he writes like a jerk, but not like a 4rth grader as someone stated above.
Maybe more like an angry teen. "Damien Rice isn't cool, stupid stupid Damien Rice, me and my cool friends all hate him". In so many words.

Whatever age he sounds like, it certainly doesn't read like something should which was written by a professional reviewer.

I think it's their style on PF. Being professional *ssholes.

And what's the deal with the decimals in their ratings anyway?

No like as in they'll give Iron and Wine a great review for a mediocre album but won't give Calexio a decent review.

They didn't know what to do when they released an album together.

They gave out about Metric just because they could. It seems they get some people to review stuff who hate that genre, so they're gonna hate it whether it's good or not. Like me for instance could never review a trance album because I hate trance so I wouldn't give a fair review.

There's good reason for them to give Iron and Wine a good review, Sam Beam is an amazing songwriter and both his albums are great.

Metric are **** though, Emily Haines sang on one of my favourite songs ever but it wasn't a Metric song.