Goner Message Board
 | Forums | Register | Reply | Search | Statistics | Manual |
Goner Message Board / Memphis / Three 6 Mafia Interview on Pitchfork
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 5:07 pm
 
Yep even Pitchfork Media wants a piece of the action!

Check it out here.
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 5:23 pm
 
who's David Porter?
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 5:31 pm
 
Serious?
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 6:03 pm
 
Wasn't he in Sam & David?
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 7:28 pm
 
Everytime it says man, all I hear in my head is mayne...

will it ever stop?
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 7:30 pm
 
oh and P.S.

David Porter is most famous as the songwriting partner of Isaac Hayes during the 1960s. Functioning as house composers for Stax, they penned most of Sam & Dave's hits, including such classics as "Soul Man" and "Hold On! I'm Coming"; they also wrote material for other acts on the roster, such as Carla Thomas, Johnnie Taylor, and the Soul Children. Starting in the late '60s, Hayes became increasingly involved in his own recording career, eventually leading to the end of the partnership. Many soul fans remain unaware that Porter also began to record his own albums for Stax. In fact, in the '60s he had released a few singles for Savoy and Hi under the pseudonyms of Little David and Kenny Cain, and had done a single for Stax itself in 1965, "Can't See You When I Want To." A remake of "Can't See You When I Want To" became a Top 30 R&B hit for Porter, and he cut several albums for Stax in the early '70s, including an ambitious concept LP, Victim of the Joke? which connected conventional pop/soul tunes with dialog. By this time he had teamed up with a different songwriting partner, Ronnie Williams, but as a solo artist he ultimately made little impact.
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 7:34 pm
 
I think they were being sarcastic! Anyway...Victim of the Joke is a badass record...the skits in between the songs are some crazy put shit. We sampled some of that record on Who Let You In Here? (The Neco). Sam & David...thats a good one Shermaine Jackson!
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 8:14 pm
 
Thanks Ms. andthecity...no sarcasm here...never heard of the guy.
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 8:21 pm | Edited by: elle
 
i like 3 6. fun stuff. i just think it's hilarious that pitchfork decided that they're cool enough to write about. fucking funny. it's hip to like 3 6 now i suppose because pitchfork told us to! haaaaaa.
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 8:33 pm
 
No kidding. Good for them (3-6) but how annoying for us. Well, maybe it will just be funny. I just really don't wanna see any pandering for Jay Leno and all that "You crazy black freaks! With an Oscar!"--it is so lame. If Juicy and Paul can deal though, go for it!
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 8:38 pm
 
i like 3 6. fun stuff. i just think it's hilarious that pitchfork decided that they're cool enough to write about. fucking funny. it's hip to like 3 6 now i suppose because pitchfork told us to! haaaaaa.


That's Pitchfork's MO... 90% Indie rock, 5% noise/garage/punk record (from someone usually considered "important" in the overall musical spectrum), 3% hip-hop review/interview (also generally by someone considered "cutting edge") and then about 2% "whatever" (Scott Walker, bootleg soul comps, etc.).

It's their way of wriggling out from under the "exclusively white-boy indie" tag. Which is bullshit. Whenever they review a hip-hop record, they make into this trancendent thing, like, "No, we're totally not those hipster white guys who listen to gangsta rap ironically. We understand it and can wax academic about it for four whole paragraphs." Not that hip-hop can't be trancendent, it's just that their review/interview choices seem curiosly timely with what's about to break/has recently broken. BORING.
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 8:45 pm
 
Sam & David? don't they play at the blue monkey on Wednesdays?
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 8:57 pm | Edited by: J Cutler
 
I'm not usually one to defend Pitchfork but Joe's breakdown seems about right. But I don't really see a problem with that, though. I don't expect to see <i>XXL</i> extolling the virtues of the Black Lips' latest 7 inch.

Likewise, Pitchfork has a specific demographic. White semi-affluent college kids really like their indie-rock with a small side of gangsta rap. Ironic? hell if I know.

no, my biggest problem with Pitchfork are the factual inaccuracies and the questionable writing of some of the (admittedly older) reviews...
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 9:01 pm
 
That was seriously the first time I had ever read an entire anything on the site. I have probably gone to it three times...eveyone has always trashed it so bad, I figured why bother?
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 9:07 pm
 
I check PF every day. I like me some indie rock sometimes, and they're big enough at this point to get exclusive interviews or news items or whatever. Like J Cutler, my biggest prob is the goofy writing. The "post-modern journalism", if you will, that tries to cram as many puns, self-references, non-sequiters, and asides as possible into every paragraph. It gets tedious and boring after a while.

And, yeah, middle-class, white indie rockers are their demo, and they gotta make money, so whatever. It just seems so obvious that they're trying REALLY hard to get cred where they don't deserve it.
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 11:12 pm
 
The "post-modern journalism", if you will, that tries to cram as many puns, self-references, non-sequiters, and asides as possible into every paragraph. It gets tedious and boring after a while.

Thank you!

"The languid, limpid quality of Jerry Douchebag's lilting voice mellifluously transcends the patriarchal boundaries of our racist, homophobic, phallocentric existence in a manner reminiscent of Charles Bukowski's more restrained work."
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 11:16 pm
 
mellifluously
I just had to look that up.
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 11:19 pm
 
Did anyone ever read that thing on Pitchfork by David Cross? He basically just made fun of Pitchfork a whole bunch.
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 11:22 pm
 
Posted: Mar 13, 2006 11:51 pm | Edited by: Rachelandthecity
 
Just like most pitchfork articles, I couldn't get past the second paragraph...



zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Posted: Mar 14, 2006 3:54 am
 
mellifluously
I just had to look that up.


Really? What does it mean? I've only ever seen it used in music reviews by people who write like literary theory majors.
Posted: Mar 14, 2006 3:13 pm
 
Pffft... you read Pitchfork.
Posted: Mar 14, 2006 3:28 pm
 
Did David Cross happen to mention how "ecstatic" he is that he has been cast as Allen Ginsberg in the next Todd Haynes movie on Dylan? Uh, yep. Along with Adrien Brody, Cate Blanchett, Colin Farrell and like 18 zillion other people playing Dylan. I'll ask my friend more as she is Todd's assistant. It was funny cos he told her and she grimaced and Todd was all panicked, "What? What? Who is he? Was there something I didn't know?"
Posted: Mar 14, 2006 10:49 pm
 
if you will, that tries to cram as many puns, self-references, non-sequiters, and asides as possible into every paragraph. It gets tedious and boring after a while.

i've read a few things in pitchfork that made me want to jam icepicks into my eyesockets and/or have an aneurysm. pretentious beyond all recognition. i will read record reviews occasionally by them to see whether or not something may be of a genre that i might like, when someone just mentions a band to me and says they like them but don't elaborate a lot. i don't take their word for whether or not something is good though, as they tend to ride the nutsack of a bunch of stuckup jerkwads. i love indie rock, but i can't stand the snobbery involved with many of the people that write about it or talk about it.
Posted: Mar 14, 2006 11:47 pm
 
i love indie rock, but i can't stand the snobbery involved with many of the people that write about it or talk about it.

I agree, except I would substitute "detest" for "love," and "and" for "but."
Top
Your Reply Click this icon to move up to the quoted message
 

 
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please, enter your username/password details upon posting a message, or register first.

 
  Goner Message Board Powered by PHP Forum Software miniBB ®