Of Montreal is some band that is apparently 'big' but I really don't know any1 who likes them. The lead singer is Kevin Barnes, and he is just some dude who 'gets naked' on stage all of the time. They released an album, and got a 6.7 from Pitchfork, and Kevin Barnes is 'all pissed off.'

Not sure who really 'likes' Of Montreal, or if they will ever release anything that 'brilliant.' Feel like they aren't supposed to be taken seriously, so they don't have a strong fan base, and most people just go see them live because Kevin Barnes gets naked on stage and makes all of the slaves in his band dress in sillie costumes.

Pictured: Kevin Barnes in a sillie centaur outfit, demonstrating he doesn't care abt indie music...instead he cares abt

Should all artists be required to respond to their Pitchfork reviews?

I learned from friends that the pitchfork review of False Priest was less than good, so I avoided reading it until tonight. I gathered from PF’s review of Skeletal Lamping that we were not a darling of their blog, but I had hoped that we’d get a slightly less disappointing writer this time around and might fair a bit better. If you have read the review you’ll know this was not the case. I have no problem with people disliking my music, and even negative criticism can be constructive, as long as the person delivering the message is insightful and intelligent. Unfortunately, the dude who wrote the False Priest review is clearly not insightful or intelligent, at least not in terms of his understanding of music production.

I think it’s criminal for a journalist to review an album and not discuss all of the songs on the album. My dude wastes sentence after sentence on the most trivial non album related bullshit before he even dives into the album critique. I guess he was trying to preface the review by clearly illustrating his poor casting for the job at hand. ok, fair enough, you shouldn’t be reviewing this album and you acknowledge that, fine, moving on.

Anyways, he did the thing where he copied and pasted the entire review, then 'emotionally reacted' 2 every sentence of the review.

Wonder if all artist just want 'a 10.0.'
Maybe p4k should start a 'fake site' for artists to read where they just get 'smoke blown up their asses' and just get to read that their albums are 'effing amazing.'

Then he closed out the response with a picture of Bristol Palin bc she is hot.

why does pitchfork always assign my albums to flaccid puritanical sex hating half humans? and why is there zero mention of the other five songs on the album? didn’t have time to listen to the whole thing? nice. well, there’s one thing i can always count on, a fair and balanced pitchfork review.

Is Of Montreal 'relevant'?
Do u like Kevin Barnes?
Does he need 2 'chill'?
Can 'being on p4k's good side make-or-break ur career?
Is he a 'pop genius'?
Do u think Solange Knowles should stop trying to 'be indie' by broing down with him and pick some1 more relevant? [via trading-up 2 the dirty projecties]
Is he a 'good musician', or is he just famous 4 taking out his peen on stage?

Pitchfork Media

Company, Blog

Pitchfork is a popular indie blogzine that does reviews and gets mad hits.

Lists: blogs and magazines

Read more>>>>