Is there anything closer to selling out in "indie" than this?
Don't even hit me with "he's doing it ironically" bullshit, either. I expected Pitchfork to be this detached from the real world, but not Panda Bear.
>selling out in "indie"
Is agreeing to do an interview "selling out?"
Why should we care about some bullshit "indie credibility?" Focus on the music, not irrelevant bullshit.
It's not like Domino is some fucking indie haven.
>he sun casts a blanket of stripes over the grass as Noah Lennox leads a small delegation through the botanical gardens in Lisbon’s Príncipe Real neighborhood. The air, damp from last night’s rain, smells sweet—fig trees, maybe, or loquats.
I call bullshit, everything from SGSTV to Sung Tongs seemed to be pretty genuinely. The majority of their early albums were avant-noise noodling, for Chirstsakes.
>Implying music as personal as Noah's isn't inextricably tied with his artistic identity.
>Implying that entire article isn't laughably ridiculous.
>Implying PBVGR wasn't anything beyond a lackluster indietronica album from a middle-aged shell of a man.
i think this is a really good article and panda bear is both fascinating and really cute.
typical college-age fuckboy who thinks he's "matured" and puts himself on a pedestal cause his favorite band is animal collective and can't handle the fact they're past their peak
What the fuck is that even supposed to mean? I had some sort of an argument and your response was to just call me vapid so you wouldn't have to actually say anything.
You, and your ellipses, can get fucked
If it's of any value I sympathise with you. Independent music culture comes out of the tradition of punk and it seems odd and funny that Pitchfork has become the establishment when it comes to music (I mean look at all the favourably reviews of mainstream label acts and tell me there are no kickbacks there). It looks like the interview is coming from a health supplements catalogue or teen vogue.
>looking morosely at ocean posing shots.
>sideways disinterested facial posing in what looks like a topiary.
The entire design layout and editorial praxis of Pitchfork is so contrived that that thin veneer of respectability is now long gone.
Animal Collective owe their entire career to Pitchfork, how can you even be shocked by this?
What's next, being surprised the next time Pitchfork does a cover story on Deerhunter or Perfect Pussy?
Well his personality stinks then. I don't care what your opinion of me is. If you think this stuff is cool you are probably still young and still impressionable which is fine as well.
That's a secondary issue, about how the success of independent culture is cannabalizing itself by mainstream success and turning itself into a caricature of what it is now expected to be. This isn't necessarily a pitchfork thing but more a critique of the culture
This board has a lot of people trying to be too edgy. What harm does it do if a music website does a profile on an artist? Call it selling out or whatever you want, but I'm a fan of his and enjoyed the read. I'd actually enjoy to read a profile of any artist/group I like. And if this isn't your thing, simply don't read it. Then just listen to the music on its own and judge the music on its own merits. An artist granting an interview doesn't mean they've completely sold out nor does reading an interview mean you're a "p4k drone" or some non-sense. Enough with the petulance.
>Well his personality stinks then.
some people are legitimately just naturally aloof. it's the impressionable teenagers who pretend to be aloof because it's cool and makes them look deep that are annoying.