A few months ago, when we read Pitchfork’s tirade-y description of a few Amy Winehouse singles–in which the singer is described as all-caps “TERRIBLE”–we figured the ‘Fork was officially declaring its anti-Amy stance. So when we saw that today’s Back To Black review bequeathed the album with a 6.4 grade (which is Pitchfork-speak for “s’okay, but get it off Oink”), we expected the write-up to bring at least a smidge of ruckus. Instead, it’s fairly glowing: Joshua Klein notes that the Winehouse “has been blessed by a brassy voice that can transform even mundane sentiments into powerful statements,” and praises the singer for “[imbuing] her music with a surprisingly genuine soulfulness.”
This thing reads like a 7.6–or maybe even an 8.0. So why the middling grade? Perhaps Pitchfork is waiting this one out, anxious to see if Winehouse will fall into the “liking pop is acceptable now” category (a la Timberlake). Or perhaps their ranking system is just as screwy as Rolling Stone.
Also, what’s up with the multiple s-bombs today? Is Peter Travers guest-editing?
Back To Black [Picthfork]