Better Late Than Never

Pitchfork released its version of the top-200 albums of the 2000s what seems like (Internet) eons of weeks ago, but it's still worth commenting about. For all the criticism the site takes -- and sometimes deserves -- I found the list quite well chosen.

Absent are the blog-buzz bands such as Wavves, Girls, the Black Lips and whoever lives in Bed-Stuy these days who occupy the hype cycle for increasingly brief spins without releasing music of much substance. Present are the indie stalwarts who are stalwarts because their well-rounded, sometimes unassuming but consistently excellent music endures. It's no surprise "Funeral," "Turn on the Bright Lights" or "Girls Can Tell" made the list (though the last was lower than it deserves), but there were also many welcome inclusions that I thought, given the hype-driven bent of Pitchfork the past three years, would be missing. "The Tyranny of Distance," "Bows and Arrows," Califone and the New Pornographers all deservedly made the cut. Even the Constantines' "Shine a Light," a routinely overlooked record, is there!

It's understandable that some records recede and others gain with time, as their influence and quality become apparent. Yet, Pitchfork's editorial approach these days is confusing. The constant superfluous news updates and use of the "Best New Music" tag to push the site's taste/scene making rather than simply good records directly counter the top-200 list's principles. In its evaluation of the decade's music, Pitchfork embraces those records that stayed faithful, but the rest of the time, its writers chase 15-minute crush after crush, which leaves bands chewed up in the hype cycle over and over again.

Then again, perhaps I'm so pleased with the list because I own 12 of the top-20 records. Anyway, to the good times: An acoustic performance by Britt Daniel, Spoon's lead singer and songwriter, of "Anything You Want," my favorite song of theirs from "Girls Can Tell":



Update: For those who prefer a number-crunching take on the top-200 list, here's an interesting one that looks at how many of the vaunted records were criticized or overlooked at the time of their release, and vice-versa. I think the most insightful comment is this one, about the difference in the number of "Best New Music" records to those that made the top-200 list: "Still, this stands as evidence that ‘Best New Music’ is not necessarily the same thing as ‘Music with the Best Staying Power’ or ‘Most Important Music.’"