This tweet from Garrett Martin inspired this conversation between Maura and myself:

Me: http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/13859-stroke-songs-for-chris-knox/
Me: talk about a dick move
Me: no Best New Music for something that could do someone some good
Maura: sigh
Maura: well
Maura: it’s not from brooklyn!
Me: HAHA

Seriously, though, what gives?  Why isn’t an 8.2 good enough?  Was there no consensus?  Was it not filled with a bunch of young, exciting acts?  I don’t care that much anymore about what’s Best New Music and what isn’t.  As a former publicist, let me tell you that it completely matters, though.  The feeling that the coveted anointing that comes with a BNM is a muddy process of top-down favoritism and ephemeral hype factor will persist until Pitchfork sets up a better explanation of the process or codifies it somehow.  Why not just say that anything over an 8.5 gets it?

—Lucas

(via chainofknives)

In defense of Pitchfork, while Stroke features new songs and some new bands, i figure Pitchfork does have a codified “Best New Music” honor they bestow onto bands or releases that stand out in the NOW, relatively speaking.

Whether Pitchfork should be rallying their readership to support a very worthwhile (and good) tribute release for Chris Knox in a Very Special News edition of Pitchfork News is a better move, I think.  I don’t read the site every day, but if they haven’t already, it would be a nice gesture if they would give Stroke a spotlight for exactly what it is: a charity compilation for a highly seminal figure in underground/indie music or what have you.  I’m not sure a “Best New Music” honor would be fitting or would really help Stroke, to be honest.

PS: But it must be said, speaking of “Stroke”, The Strokes’ “The Modern Age” (2001) is — through and through — a plagiarism on Tall Dwarfs’ “Crush” from 1984 as far as the instrumentation and primary melody lines go. So having a Strokes Stroke benefit would do a lot more for Chris Knox than any of the above! Julian? Albert?  You listenin’?