Pick Of The ‘Fork: Can You Spot The Fake?

And we’re back again with the now-twice-a-month Pick Of The ‘Fork, in which we take recent examples of gonzo Pitchfork writing, and see if you can find the impostor. This week, we’re focusing on some of the wordier passages from the past two weeks; the only problem is that our poll-presentation system only hold so many words, so you’ll have to scroll down to vote:

A) “Over 40 minutes, despite generally clear transitions from pattern to pattern, the sonic range of choral parts is relatively small, and the actual harmonies being sung can be distractingly same-y– which makes sense when you consider they were borne out of a single chord that was merely pitched up or down.”

B) “But that tripped-out triptych can’t carry the entire album, which revels in its own base desires, while simultaneously pretending to be merely observing them for a neutral audience–an audience that probably doesn’t hit the clubs at night just to stand in the corner and gaze at their own pierced navels.”

C) “If he would address the political through this personal lens, exploring his own complicity in the military-industrial complex he currently lambastes from a false outside perspective, he might arrive at commentary that’s more about insight and confrontation than moral flattery.”

D) “Other people’s dreams can be beautifully told, as in Michel Gondry films or Cocteau Twins LPs, but most of the time they’re just boring: Some dude tells me he had a nightmare about his boss turning into a mule-hung Valkyrie (TMI, bro), and I’m all, yeah, let me tell you about the dream I had snorting sea monkeys with Billy Corgan.”

Gawker Media polls require Javascript; if you’re viewing this in an RSS reader, click through to view in your Javascript-enabled web browser.