I just can’t help but take a moment to note the difference in journalistic approaches between Cokemachineglow‘s and Pitchfork‘s reviews of Wolf Parade’s latest offering. One, thoughtful and effective in contextualizing an album that might not represent the most approachable of big name releases this year; the other reactionary and predictable. Amanda Petrusich‘s review for Pitchfork reads almost as if it came from their news department – it makes sure to report on the assumed conflict between two band members who have successful side-projects, and makes full use of the press release in noting the difference in production credits from their first album. Then there is Mark Abraham‘s strategy to address the persona conflict but understand the greater context that is the root of Dan vs. Spencer-ism. His opening anecdote is as much a critique of modern memes as it is a summation of Wolf Parade’s thematic aspirations. It’s a review that takes the discussion beyond the flavor-of-the-month hype-fest and spotlights the conflicting and united visions that give Wolf Parade’s music depth worthy of attention. Oh, and he also threw in this gem:
We’re so hard-wired as humans to define ourselves through the shit we buy [...] that we produce alternative consumer cultures where the objects we own mean what we want ourselves to mean and then we turn around and say we live a different way than our parents.
Talk about getting into the mindset of the band you are reviewing.
On a complete and unwarranted side note, I know they pushed themselves in a different direction on Mount Zoomer, and I can certainly appreciate that… but I still want to hear “Cathedral Bells” as a b-side or something.
I like the approach but I’d like to see it cut to half the length.
the review, you mean… i don’t know, i like that it is so verbose. like once you hit a roll, just go for it. people can skim…
kudos for pointing out how shitty Amanda P.’s review was. it actually pissed me off when i read it. it’s blatantly obvious she didn’t bother to listen to the last 1/3 of the album more than once. inexcusable, especially from a senior critic on a site with so much influence. she should stick to reviewing alt-county and bob dylan re-issue. I hope to god she doesn’t get to review an animal collective record anytime soon. shame on her.
he was rolling. i was like, ok i know the band is going to come into this at somepoint, and then i was like, ok, um, is he going to talk about the record. definitely took the long road to get there.