Lets Email the Author of the Terrible Pitchfork Review
imissyoualready
Posts: 438
Here's his email: <!-- e --><a href="mailto:joshuaglove@gmail.com">joshuaglove@gmail.com</a><!-- e --> (his email is posted on the PF site so this is not 'wrong')
and Here's the TERRIBLE review:
Pearl Jam
Backspacer
4.6
If you're between the ages of, say, 25 and 35, chances are you either significantly overrate or underrate Pearl Jam. Either you carry a certain nostalgist's sentiment for one of your early rock touchstones (I fall into this camp), or you view them as the root of all that was overwrought and evil about mid-to-late-90s guitar music. Sure, everyone knows PJ sold eleven trillion albums between 1991 and '94, but still I imagine it's difficult for relative young'uns to reconcile how strong an opinion so many people in a specific demographic have about a group that hasn't been commercially or critically relevant for over a decade.
Backspacer, the group's 10th studio album, seems to suggest in its tossed-off 37 minutes that Pearl Jam have no greater concern and regard for what they do than the rest of the world can muster. Virtually the whole record settles into the same formula the band's been dutifully churning out since the dawn of the millennium-- lively but almost utterly hookless riff-driven hard rock. Lather, rinse, repeat. And when I say "riff-driven" I really mean "almost entirely riff-dependent," because musically the riffs themselves are typically the only things worth your attention.
PJ's long-dormant punk and hardcore proclivities (ugh, "Lukin") have been rising to the surface with greater regularity in recent years, and I'll admit in short bursts this bulldozing approach can be somewhat satisfying. The opening four songs kick-start and then keep up a certain pleasing level of propulsiveness, with the goofily fast-and-loose "Gonna See My Friend" (hey, is that an actual bassline I hear?) and Thin Lizzy-ish double entendres of "Johnny Guitar" being particularly listenable. Sooner or later, however, you remember these guys wouldn't know a melody if it bit them in the ass. What's worse, this chugging blitzkrieg negates the power of the band's greatest weapon, Eddie Vedder's voice, which can display its craggy richness and masculine grace only when the band isn't trying to break land-speed records. (I know some folks hate Ed's singing, but it mostly seems like they're reacting to the fact that his voice launched a thousand Nickelbacks, which is like hating "The Simpsons" because of "Family Guy" or "American Dad".)
The gentle "Just Breathe" might seem like the perfect opportunity for Vedder to finally dust off those resonant pipes, but instead he sings the tune with a distractingly country-ish catch in his voice, plus the tune is numbingly syrupy and the lyrics, after a promisingly pointed start ("I'm a lucky man to count on both hands the ones I love") devolve into tedium. The same hit-or-miss sensitivity marks "The End"-- Vedder inexplicably finds it necessary to remind us he's "just a human being" on one song and "just another human being" on the other-- but at least "The End" manages to land on the right side of affecting thanks to its painfully honest depiction of romantic dissolution ("This is not me/ You see/ Believe/ I'm better than this/ Don't leave"). Still, we have to rely on "Amongst the Waves" to deliver anything remotely resembling the soaring anthemics that used to be a PJ trademark (what I wouldn't give for a "Light Years" even). The back half of the album sure isn't inclined to help, largely abandoning even the modest steamrolling enjoyment of the record's initial jolt in favor of thoroughly forgettable mid-tempo dreck, save for "Speed of Sound", which nonetheless sounds like a band trying to be the Ramones minus the fun.
It's an extremely odd thing to say about a band that for three or four years was the biggest rock megalith on the planet, but nowadays Pearl Jam are the very definition of anonymously workmanlike, seemingly plugging along with their heads down from one colorlessly unimaginative album to the next. Once upon a time this was a group that was on top of the world and yet still took all kinds of bizarre chances, recording shit like lengthy tape experiments and songs about bugs-- often ridiculously self-indulgent, sure, yet always surprising. Now, paradoxically, with the spotlights long since extinguished, Pearl Jam seem content to do things by the book.
— Joshua Love, September 22, 2009
and Here's the TERRIBLE review:
Pearl Jam
Backspacer
4.6
If you're between the ages of, say, 25 and 35, chances are you either significantly overrate or underrate Pearl Jam. Either you carry a certain nostalgist's sentiment for one of your early rock touchstones (I fall into this camp), or you view them as the root of all that was overwrought and evil about mid-to-late-90s guitar music. Sure, everyone knows PJ sold eleven trillion albums between 1991 and '94, but still I imagine it's difficult for relative young'uns to reconcile how strong an opinion so many people in a specific demographic have about a group that hasn't been commercially or critically relevant for over a decade.
Backspacer, the group's 10th studio album, seems to suggest in its tossed-off 37 minutes that Pearl Jam have no greater concern and regard for what they do than the rest of the world can muster. Virtually the whole record settles into the same formula the band's been dutifully churning out since the dawn of the millennium-- lively but almost utterly hookless riff-driven hard rock. Lather, rinse, repeat. And when I say "riff-driven" I really mean "almost entirely riff-dependent," because musically the riffs themselves are typically the only things worth your attention.
PJ's long-dormant punk and hardcore proclivities (ugh, "Lukin") have been rising to the surface with greater regularity in recent years, and I'll admit in short bursts this bulldozing approach can be somewhat satisfying. The opening four songs kick-start and then keep up a certain pleasing level of propulsiveness, with the goofily fast-and-loose "Gonna See My Friend" (hey, is that an actual bassline I hear?) and Thin Lizzy-ish double entendres of "Johnny Guitar" being particularly listenable. Sooner or later, however, you remember these guys wouldn't know a melody if it bit them in the ass. What's worse, this chugging blitzkrieg negates the power of the band's greatest weapon, Eddie Vedder's voice, which can display its craggy richness and masculine grace only when the band isn't trying to break land-speed records. (I know some folks hate Ed's singing, but it mostly seems like they're reacting to the fact that his voice launched a thousand Nickelbacks, which is like hating "The Simpsons" because of "Family Guy" or "American Dad".)
The gentle "Just Breathe" might seem like the perfect opportunity for Vedder to finally dust off those resonant pipes, but instead he sings the tune with a distractingly country-ish catch in his voice, plus the tune is numbingly syrupy and the lyrics, after a promisingly pointed start ("I'm a lucky man to count on both hands the ones I love") devolve into tedium. The same hit-or-miss sensitivity marks "The End"-- Vedder inexplicably finds it necessary to remind us he's "just a human being" on one song and "just another human being" on the other-- but at least "The End" manages to land on the right side of affecting thanks to its painfully honest depiction of romantic dissolution ("This is not me/ You see/ Believe/ I'm better than this/ Don't leave"). Still, we have to rely on "Amongst the Waves" to deliver anything remotely resembling the soaring anthemics that used to be a PJ trademark (what I wouldn't give for a "Light Years" even). The back half of the album sure isn't inclined to help, largely abandoning even the modest steamrolling enjoyment of the record's initial jolt in favor of thoroughly forgettable mid-tempo dreck, save for "Speed of Sound", which nonetheless sounds like a band trying to be the Ramones minus the fun.
It's an extremely odd thing to say about a band that for three or four years was the biggest rock megalith on the planet, but nowadays Pearl Jam are the very definition of anonymously workmanlike, seemingly plugging along with their heads down from one colorlessly unimaginative album to the next. Once upon a time this was a group that was on top of the world and yet still took all kinds of bizarre chances, recording shit like lengthy tape experiments and songs about bugs-- often ridiculously self-indulgent, sure, yet always surprising. Now, paradoxically, with the spotlights long since extinguished, Pearl Jam seem content to do things by the book.
— Joshua Love, September 22, 2009
Toledo '96, Cleveland '98, Columbus '00, Cleveland '03, Toledo '04
Washington D.C. '04, London '05,Hamilton '05,Grand Rapids '06,
Cleveland '06, Detroit '06,Pittsburgh '06,Cincinnati '06,Chicago '07
NYC '08, NYC '08, Chicago '09, Chicago '09, ACL '09, Columbus 2010, Noblesville 2010, Cleveland 2010, Buffalo 2010.
Washington D.C. '04, London '05,Hamilton '05,Grand Rapids '06,
Cleveland '06, Detroit '06,Pittsburgh '06,Cincinnati '06,Chicago '07
NYC '08, NYC '08, Chicago '09, Chicago '09, ACL '09, Columbus 2010, Noblesville 2010, Cleveland 2010, Buffalo 2010.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Cleveland 5/20/2006
Pittsburgh 6/23/2006
Columbia 6/16/2008
Bristow 5/13/2010
Pitchfork has always hated PJ. Isnt it strange that, no matter the author, the articles are almost always bad?
Washington D.C. '04, London '05,Hamilton '05,Grand Rapids '06,
Cleveland '06, Detroit '06,Pittsburgh '06,Cincinnati '06,Chicago '07
NYC '08, NYC '08, Chicago '09, Chicago '09, ACL '09, Columbus 2010, Noblesville 2010, Cleveland 2010, Buffalo 2010.
hey, imissyoualready, what's your email address?
Without knowing his other reviews I can tell you....every pitchfork writer loves indie albums and hates mainstream. It's pretty clear he was going to give this album a bad review before he even heard it...
I read Pitchfork but I've come to not take them seriously at all...
Recently Pitchfork reviewed The Beatles remastered albums. The first thing I thought was why are they rating these at all? I mean, it's the Beatles... they don't NEED to be rated... Anyway... they rated them and while most of the albums got perfect 10's a lot of the earlier records got lower scores...
Please Please Me – 9.5
With The Beatles – 8.8
A Hard Day’s Night – 9.7
The Beatles For Sale – 9.3
How can The Beatles get these scores and bands like The Arcade Fire, Bonnie Prince Billy & …And You Will Know Us By The Trail Of Dead get perfect 10's?
Cleveland 5/20/2006
Pittsburgh 6/23/2006
Columbia 6/16/2008
Bristow 5/13/2010
Pitchfork loves the bands that line their pockets. As a musician, i came close to working with them in the past and I can tell you that if you spend with them, they take care of you.
Washington D.C. '04, London '05,Hamilton '05,Grand Rapids '06,
Cleveland '06, Detroit '06,Pittsburgh '06,Cincinnati '06,Chicago '07
NYC '08, NYC '08, Chicago '09, Chicago '09, ACL '09, Columbus 2010, Noblesville 2010, Cleveland 2010, Buffalo 2010.
Abbey Road, Let it Be, Revolver, Rubber Soul, White Album deserve a 10. the earlier ones and Magical Mystery Tour are often not worth much more than a 7. You can't give it a 10 just because it's the Beatles. Same as we can't give everything a 10 just because it's Pearl Jam.
Writing to the author is a terrible idea though. That's not gonna make him like PJ more or be kinder to them next time, is it?!
Well there are two Backspacer ads on the site right now, and that didn't seem to help much...
Is this 'vendetta' sour grapes then?
A review is a review. The writer of this review is entitled to his opinion just like everyone here is entitled to theirs. Are you going to spam posters on this site that are not particularly thrilled about the album or some of the songs?
I have sour grapes about the album review not about choosing not to work with a trendy, high-priced online magazine. LOL though.
Washington D.C. '04, London '05,Hamilton '05,Grand Rapids '06,
Cleveland '06, Detroit '06,Pittsburgh '06,Cincinnati '06,Chicago '07
NYC '08, NYC '08, Chicago '09, Chicago '09, ACL '09, Columbus 2010, Noblesville 2010, Cleveland 2010, Buffalo 2010.
Would they be happiest being the only person in a bar listening to a band? Think Indie...like everyone else! Their clique is devoted to anti-mainstream music...I am confused though, it is ok to like M. Ward AND Pearl Jam, isn't it???...I love MOST bands from the Pitfork mold, AND Pearl Jam...
I had my buddy stuck in an argument...He is a straight indie, fuck mainstream guy. He has LOVED Kings of Leon for years, and I said to him a few months back "Now that KOL are on the cover of RS, SPIN and every other magazine, are they not good??? Has their music changed??? He had nothing to say.
Indie is just the latest, greatest clique to push the idea of individuality. Problem is, when they start selling checkered plaid pants at Old Navy, it ain't so unique anymore!
Backspacer is amazing. I do not like the final album cut of Speed of Sound, it blows compared to the demo version. To say anything negative about this album as a whole is an opinion, but not mine.
Here! Here!
Washington D.C. '04, London '05,Hamilton '05,Grand Rapids '06,
Cleveland '06, Detroit '06,Pittsburgh '06,Cincinnati '06,Chicago '07
NYC '08, NYC '08, Chicago '09, Chicago '09, ACL '09, Columbus 2010, Noblesville 2010, Cleveland 2010, Buffalo 2010.
...and I don't even think he bothered listening to the album at all.
What I'm doing is comparing previous albums that they have given 10's to vs. the ratings of the beatles albums... I really don't agree that an Arcade Fire album (i like them) is better than any of those beatles albums that didn't get 10's... I'm not suggesting that PJ should get a 10 simply b/c they're PJ...
and yeah I think writing to him would be pointless... I just think they should try a little harder to write something that is more substantial rather than write drivel like this.
I feel the same way. I love indie music AND PJ... I listen to a lot of different stuff but not b/c Pitchfork tells me to.
What does "Indy" mean? Does it mean you dont have a major label distribution deal? I would think that's what it would have to mean and, *Lightbulb*, none of the bands in the "Indy" genre are really "Indy" at all. And, technically, that makes PJ an Indy band now.....in the US anyway.
Washington D.C. '04, London '05,Hamilton '05,Grand Rapids '06,
Cleveland '06, Detroit '06,Pittsburgh '06,Cincinnati '06,Chicago '07
NYC '08, NYC '08, Chicago '09, Chicago '09, ACL '09, Columbus 2010, Noblesville 2010, Cleveland 2010, Buffalo 2010.
Us PJ lovers have to learn to let bad reviews go. ( even though it makes our blood boil )
It does nothing for us.
Give them no spotlight.
Technically, yeah, "indie" means non-major...however a more appropriate term is probably non-mainstream.
And they did give a ton of Beatles albums perfect 10's. Im a huge Beatles fan, and even I was pretty shocked when they gave "Magical Mystery Tour" a perfect 10.
he didnt like it, thats his opinion. The only opinion in music that counts is your own. At least they are reviewing the music, and not the policitics, or the past.....
I say it's OK to email this guy, so long as you are willing to email everybody who gave it a positive review and say, "Good job!"
for the least they could possibly do
its his opinion... he's entitled to it... leave it at that
:idea: :idea:
Cleveland 5/20/2006
Pittsburgh 6/23/2006
Columbia 6/16/2008
Bristow 5/13/2010