Reviews for The Pitchfork 500: Our Guide to the Greatest Songs from Punk to the Present

The average rating for The Pitchfork 500: Our Guide to the Greatest Songs from Punk to the Present based on 2 reviews is 2.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2019-09-06 00:00:00 Rocco Racano This was okay. Other people can talk about why Pitchfork is unintentionally bad better than I can so I won't linger on it too much. I only really cared about the 80's and 90's bits because the 2000's were filled with too many white interchangeable indie musicians and all the 70's ones were just trying to gaslight you into thinking experimental guitar clawing is actually really accessible and dancable. I think they did an okay job at getting enough pop, dance, and even the occasional R&B covered in here but they definitely over stressed the importance of people who has me thinking "really? one of the 500 greatest?" like Aphex Twin. I know when it comes to rap Pitchfork is actually semi credible (or at least as credible as white writers can be) but their taste in rap music is usually just "aha! you didn't expect random white people from Michigan to like Yeezus, right?"- style hype beasts, so I'm side eyeing some of their rap inclusions but ignoring (in my opinion) influential people like PM Dawn, Queen Latifah, TLC, Digable Planets, Neneh Cherry, (interesting how New Jack Swing [commercial and now dated, but still an innovative genre bending sound] got 0 mention at all but IDM and French House were allegedly all the rage... hm), the Fugees, Arrested Development, and Lauryn Hill. If it was up to me, I also would've include Janet Jackson, Fiona Apple, Tori Amos, and Garbage, but then it wouldn't be Pitchfork 500, so... What I actually did really enjoy about this book were the chapter headers that summarized each 3 years covered (ie- 1997 to 1999) and the changes that were taking place in the music industry at the time. It was able to explain everything clearly without sounding academic and I would actually like to read more stuff like that. I also enjoyed all the sub lists they randomly sprinkled throughout the book, like pages dedicated to alt country, twee pop, and emo. It was a clever way to include way more artists (I'm happy that Brandy got one more shout out) other than the 500 greatest songs. I would totally get a "[music publication]'s 250 made up niche music scenes and playlists" book next. Maybe I should explore the Pitchfork website before the paywall goes up.

Review # 2 was written on 2009-03-15 00:00:00 Paul Babineau In which a gaggle of pointdexters attempt to wax hilarious, authoritative, and/or iconoclastic on their nuevo canon. As you can guess, two thirds of the book is just Pitchbork scribblers' take on the received pre-2000 canon -- very few surprises, unless you are shocked by the inclusion of "I Can't Go For That (No Can Do)" and the Suspiria soundtrack. Some mildly informative sidebars too, on grindcore and twee pop and such: BUT the sidebar on "Yacht Rock" was so droll and snobby it catapulted me into a violent pro-Firefall fugue state. The 'forklifters don't make it very explicit in the book, but the last third is really Pitchfork's celebration of their own turn-of-the-century Gen-Z canon. There are many groovy songs here (also lots of indefensible wuss music on the order of Devendra Banhart and Animal Collective). But the writing damn near inverted my corneas with its preposterous press-kit wankery, e.g. "Many critics hoped Radiohead would become the biggest band in the world; instead they threatened to become the best." (That's a quote from editor-in-chief Scott Plagenhoef, in case you were worried I'm picking on some starving freelancer.) If we eat any more S'Mores like that we're likely to pass out before the circle jerk even gets off the ground! There are three interesting writers here: Nate Patrin, Douglas Wolk, and Julianne Escobedo Shepherd. Look for their initials. As for the rest, have a bottle of whiskey and a damp washcloth at hand.