_genic reviewed by Pitchfork (!). Do you agree?

[MMC]

Pitchfork reviewed _genic and gave it 6.7/10.

They usually don't review pop albums let alone J-Pop, with the only exception of Kyary Pamyu Pamyu. 

 

 

J-pop performer Namie Amuro is one of the best-selling artists in Japanese music history. She helped inspired fashion trends, paved the way for similar solo singers, and—most impressively—outlasted all of her competition, adapting to new styles that helped her stay fresh to the often-fickle Japanese casual music consumer. Beginning her career in the highly goofy group Super Monkey's, she went solo after label higher-ups singled her out, and she rose to prominence through a mix of dance numbers and ballads. Since, she's glided from R&B to poppy hip-hop.  She's an unknown entity Stateside—well, at least to those who didn't watch Toonami daily—but huge in Asia. In Japan, at least, she really has nothing left to prove.

This January, Japanese publication Business Journal reported that Amuro bought a house in Los Angeles and is preparing to take a shot at the American market. Her 13th album, _genic, is not quite that bid for American domination: It hasn't been backed by a media blitz or hyped-up collaborations. It isn't even available in the States yet, though the rest of her discography hitting iTunes hints that it eventually will be. Yet the album still implies a shift in approach. Amuro sings mostly in English, and teamed up with a couple well-known Western producers, including David Guetta.

In recent years, she has tacked towards EDM, but where recent attempts have felt like cheap replicas,  _genic sounds more inspired and confident. "Time Has Come" sells the drama of wanting to escape "this sleeping town" via sudden tempo changes, while "Stranger" delivers a stuttering hook, adding an element of welcome unease. (At one point, EDM wonderkid Zedd, who provided a song for Amuro's last album, was rumored to be the producer behind the song "Stranger", but his name is nowhere to be found in the notes.)

Amuro stumbles at various points, such as on "Every Woman", a well-intentioned but awkward empowerment anthem, and the love-as-schoolyard whistler "It". The album's big Guetta collaboration, relegated to the bonus track "What I Did for Love", is its most formulaic number. The other big tripping point is Amuro's decision to primarily sing in English, a choice she made three albums ago. Her English-speaking fans tend to mock her relentlessly for this, and at times she slips over pronunciation. Yet her lyrics have never been a high point even in Japanese, and on _genic she delivers her words directly and with a confidence that smooths over any small mistakes.

Then there is "B Who I Want 2 Be", one of the weirder songs to grace a major-label pop album in 2015. Many would glance at the credits and assume it stands out because of PC Music-affiliated producer Sophie. The song boasts his signature artificial fizz, but it's his decision to leave plenty of space for the singers that ends up his best move. That's because "2 B" finds Amuro dueting with singing-synthesizer avatar Hatsune Miku, though the way Vocaloid artist Mitchie M tunes her results in a song where the two singers blur into one digi-voice. There's a definite Uncanny Valley vibe, but everything clicks together just right to create a disorientingly catchy number.

Still, _genic's best moment is its most straightforward. "Golden Touch" breakbeats forward, every few seconds leading to synths that burst like fireworks over the song. It all builds to one of the most joyful choruses of Amuro's career, the sort of hook begging to be blasted by passing cars. It's song-of-the-summer material thanks to its directness, mirrored by an equally lighthearted and effective video. It's great pop because no one involved sounds like they're worrying about how to tailor her music to new audiences. If Amuro ever takes advantage of her new digs and tries to debut properly in the U.S., she should try to hold onto the simplicity of this feeling.

Source: pitchfork.com
Written by: Patrick St. Michel

 

What do you think of it?

[DocumentaLy]

Ehh, I normally don't agree with Patrick and in this case I don't again. He tends to be more into EDM while I really hate it.

[MMC]

Overall I agree with him this time. But I still think that B Who I Want 2 B is a bit all over the place. 

[NATE]

There are some songs I really like that he wasn't fond of like "It." I would rate the album slightly higher, but overall I agree with him. Though I wouldn't think this would be on their radar tbh.

[DocumentaLy]

There are some songs I really like that he wasn't fond of like "It." I would rate the album slightly higher, but overall I agree with him. Though I wouldn't think this would be on their radar tbh.

 

It's not. Patrick is a blogger than lives in Japan and writes for them occasionally.

[Delincious]

Ehhh this review seems a bit superficial.

[Alexâš¡Thunder]

Regardless of the score he gave. This review seems rushed and not so convincing.

[MofShibuya]

Patrick is a good friend of mine, he introduced me to the editor at Japan Times (where I've written a few pieces, mostly about netlabel releases... but enough about me) and has a very big heart... but I'll admit, I have no idea what he's doing with these reviews. There doesn't really seem to be any overlap between the audience of people who read Pitchfork and people who would listen to a Namie Amuro album, regardless of which hot-right-now EDM producers' names are attached to it, and it's reviews like this one that seem the most pointless; introducing something completely foreign to most of the site's readership, only to say it isn't actually that great overall. He says he wants to spread awareness of J-pop to Pitchfork's readers, with getting AKB48 on the site as a goal he's mentioned (whether or not he was kidding remains to be seen), but if "awareness" means a 6.7 score for an album that probably won't catch anyone's interest after reading the review, its value seems a little dubious.

[MMC]

KPP's and CAPSULE's reviews were a bit pointless too, because neither of them released remarkable records (if not their worst).
 

Why didn't he review artists like Shiina Ringo, YUKI, Superfly or bands like Soil & "Pimp" Sessions, Sakanaction or even breakthrough acts like Negoto and many others?
Namie Amuro should be on Billboard or on Popjustice front page. The average pitchfork reader is really not her audience.

 

BABYMETAL were targeted from the beginning to their potential (international) audience and in the end they found one. 

[Manila Luzon]

Nah the score is too high.

[MofShibuya]

KPP's and CAPSULE's reviews were a bit pointless too, because neither of them released remarkable records (if not their worst).

As someone who also wrote a review of Wave Runner for a Western publication, I thought that it would be an interesting curiosity for EDM devotees - not sure if that was Patrick's intention, but I can easily see contemporary Capsule having more of a novelty appeal than the harder-to-explain choice of reviewing _genic.

[Mandilinn]

The score should be a little higher (at least a 7), but overall it's a decent review. 

 

As someone who also wrote a review of Wave Runner for a Western publication, I thought that it would be an interesting curiosity for EDM devotees - not sure if that was Patrick's intention, but I can easily see contemporary Capsule having more of a novelty appeal than the harder-to-explain choice of reviewing _genic.

 

Off topic, but I haven't seen you around before. Looking at your post count, you're new, right? Welcome!

[MofShibuya]

Off topic, but I haven't seen you around before. Looking at your post count, you're new, right? Welcome!

Yep! My girlfriend told me I should get an account and start posting here, and who am I to disagree?

 

Edit - just FYI, for anyone who thinks the review score seems off... it's one of the dirty little secrets of the music press that, if an editor thinks your review doesn't reflect the score you gave it, the editor can change it without your consent before posting. It's happened to me before.

[DocumentaLy]

Patrick is a good friend of mine, he introduced me to the editor at Japan Times (where I've written a few pieces, mostly about netlabel releases... but enough about me) and has a very big heart... but I'll admit, I have no idea what he's doing with these reviews. There doesn't really seem to be any overlap between the audience of people who read Pitchfork and people who would listen to a Namie Amuro album, regardless of which hot-right-now EDM producers' names are attached to it, and it's reviews like this one that seem the most pointless; introducing something completely foreign to most of the site's readership, only to say it isn't actually that great overall. He says he wants to spread awareness of J-pop to Pitchfork's readers, with getting AKB48 on the site as a goal he's mentioned (whether or not he was kidding remains to be seen), but if "awareness" means a 6.7 score for an album that probably won't catch anyone's interest after reading the review, its value seems a little dubious.

 

Hold up... Memories of Shibuya? Your site is really good.

 

He wants to get AKB48 on Pitchfork eventually? Why? 

 

This review has been spreading around various international JPop fan sites and most people hate it. Some like the attention Namie is getting, but that's as far as it goes.

 

The question I have for you, as a writer, is... what is the goal of the writer? When writing about Japanese music for an international audience, is the goal to reach fans of Japanese music, or music fans in general? Should the writer focus on what is popular, or what is deemed to be of value? Or should it be a mix of the two?

 

Like in the case of Pitchfork, I would get reviewing something that is complementary to the tastes of the site's readers, an act like Gesu no Kiwami Otome. or cero. I don't get reviewing Namie or Kyary though. It's more a presentation of Japanese music as a curiosity more than anything else. Like I remember being a kid and seeing reports about Shibuya-kei in magazines like Spin, and it wasn't presented as a curiosity, but as a complement to the taste of the readers.

 

 

KPP's and CAPSULE's reviews were a bit pointless too, because neither of them released remarkable records (if not their worst).

 

Why didn't he review artists like Shiina Ringo, YUKI, Superfly or bands like Soil & "Pimp" Sessions, Sakanaction or even breakthrough acts like Negoto and many others?

Namie Amuro should be on Billboard or on Popjustice front page. The average pitchfork reader is really not her audience.

 

BABYMETAL were targeted from the beginning to their potential (international) audience and in the end they found one. 

 

Exactly.

[MofShibuya]

 

 

Hold up... Memories of Shibuya? Your site is really good.

Thanks! It's on a bit of a hiatus right now, but I have a new mix ready to post up on Friday. It's a really good one, smooth J-urban - not explicitly Shibuya-kei but very much in line with the spirit of the genre.

 

He wants to get AKB48 on Pitchfork eventually? Why?

Your guess, I'm afraid, is as good as mine.

 

 

The question I have for you, as a writer, is... what is the goal of the writer? When writing about Japanese music for an international audience, is the goal to reach fans of Japanese music, or music fans in general? Should the writer focus on what is popular, or what is deemed to be of value? Or should it be a mix of the two?

 

Like in the case of Pitchfork, I would get reviewing something that is complementary to the tastes of the site's readers, an act like Gesu no Kiwami Otome. or cero. I don't get reviewing Namie or Kyary though. It's more a presentation of Japanese music as a curiosity more than anything else. Like I remember being a kid and seeing reports about Shibuya-kei in magazines like Spin, and it wasn't presented as a curiosity, but as a complement to the taste of the readers.

Pitchfork, specifically, is having an image crisi lately, where they're covering top 40 every bit as zealously as they once sought to unearth obscurities, and I'm assuming that they figure their new lack of any specialty or focus means that they're appealing to everybody instead of just diluting their brand until it means nothing. The new Taylor Swift video doesn't need to be on Pitchfork, yet it is. The new Namie Amuro doesn't need to be on Pitchfork, yet their staff is so clueless about Japanese music that I assume they just figure that Patrick is their guy and he'll post what's good over there.

 

For me, I'm with you in thinking it's entirely dependent on the publication. When I wrote that Capsule review on PopMatters, I was... well, to be perfectly honest I was just looking for writing practice and I happened to have the album lying around, waiting to be reviewed, but the approach I tried to take was one of introducing EDM fans to a different culture's take on the genre, acknowledging that it doesn't sound much like typical J-pop but still is different enough to have some novelty value. Ideally, I would have been writing about an album I liked more than I liked Wave Runner, but we work with what we have. I think it's vitally important that a publication - like the lifestyle music magazines you mentioned - have a coherent aesthetic and bring in complementary music, because otherwise things are just too scattershot and you get this Pitchfork mess.

[DocumentaLy]

Thanks! It's on a bit of a hiatus right now, but I have a new mix ready to post up on Friday. It's a really good one, smooth J-urban - not explicitly Shibuya-kei but very much in line with the spirit of the genre.

 

Your guess, I'm afraid, is as good as mine.

 

 

Pitchfork, specifically, is having an image crisi lately, where they're covering top 40 every bit as zealously as they once sought to unearth obscurities, and I'm assuming that they figure their new lack of any specialty or focus means that they're appealing to everybody instead of just diluting their brand until it means nothing. The new Taylor Swift video doesn't need to be on Pitchfork, yet it is. The new Namie Amuro doesn't need to be on Pitchfork, yet their staff is so clueless about Japanese music that I assume they just figure that Patrick is their guy and he'll post what's good over there.

 

For me, I'm with you in thinking it's entirely dependent on the publication. When I wrote that Capsule review on PopMatters, I was... well, to be perfectly honest I was just looking for writing practice and I happened to have the album lying around, waiting to be reviewed, but the approach I tried to take was one of introducing EDM fans to a different culture's take on the genre, acknowledging that it doesn't sound much like typical J-pop but still is different enough to have some novelty value. Ideally, I would have been writing about an album I liked more than I liked Wave Runner, but we work with what we have. I think it's vitally important that a publication - like the lifestyle music magazines you mentioned - have a coherent aesthetic and bring in complementary music, because otherwise things are just too scattershot and you get this Pitchfork mess.

 

J-Urban is one of my areas of focus, so I'll definitely be looking forward to that post.

 

I think international Japanese music fans like the idea of the scene being discussed in English on international sites. But the issue I find after talking to fans, is that they don't like what is being presented or how it's being presented. There are examples of both in this very thread. And then sometimes it's as if no research is really put in before writing the article. A good example would be that article Ian Martin wrote about that 48 group. I read it and it didn't really make sense to me. I posted it here and there was a similar response: http://onehallyu.com/topic/154109-leave-charts-to-fans-of-music-not-gimmicks/

 

But yeah, I think things should be complementary.

[MofShibuya]

I think international Japanese music fans like the idea of the scene being discussed in English on international sites. But the issue I find after talking to fans, is that they don't like what is being presented or how it's being presented.

 

"So, you see, we've got this cake, and it's great to have it... but do you think it's too much to ask that we get to eat it too?" - Fandom

[MMC]

^I'm reading your blog. Towa Tei (which is actually the first Japanese act that I came across to, thanks to that collab with Kylie) is another good example of what should be on Pitchfork. 

[DocumentaLy]

"So, you see, we've got this cake, and it's great to have it... but do you think it's too much to ask that we get to eat it too?" - Fandom

 

Do you really think it's that?

[MofShibuya]

Do you really think it's that?

Well, not necessarily. It's more a matter of only wanting "the right kind" of exposure for the thing they love, while being unable to figure out what, exactly, the right kind of exposure is. I assume the ideal (for fans) would be to have someone from within the fandom writing about it, but that gets tricky fast because people who count themselves as part of a fandom are generally among the least objective and most biased on that subject. Which brings us full circle back to asking about the purpose of these reviews, as the limited appeal of J-pop performers like Amuro (for foreigners) outside of their cultish fan followings would seem rather soundly counter-intuitive to writing about them at all, regardless of the context.

 

St-Michel, for some background, says his favourite musical group is Perfume and he said his goal was to get AKB48 on Pitchfork after he had written about Hatsune Miku for the same site. Although he writes about the alternative on his Make Believe Melodies site, mostly in his coverage of the netlabel scene, it becomes very clear that he honestly does love J-pop and wants to spread it - the reviews he writes of mediocre Japanese albums are almost always new releases from groups or performers that he would love to have introduced in their prime, but without any reissues to write about he gets stuck having to cover an unimpressive one instead. Do I, personally, think an average Pitchfork reader (who likely came to the site to read up on the War on Drugs/Sun Kil Moon beef) is likely to find any value in going back and looking through Namie Amuro's back catalogue? Not really, but then again I wouldn't write about Hatsune Miku for that site either.

[DocumentaLy]

Well, not necessarily. It's more a matter of only wanting "the right kind" of exposure for the thing they love, while being unable to figure out what, exactly, the right kind of exposure is. I assume the ideal (for fans) would be to have someone from within the fandom writing about it, but that gets tricky fast because people who count themselves as part of a fandom are generally among the least objective and most biased on that subject. Which brings us full circle back to asking about the purpose of these reviews, as the limited appeal of J-pop performers like Amuro (for foreigners) outside of their cultish fan followings would seem rather soundly counter-intuitive to writing about them at all, regardless of the context.

 

St-Michel, for some background, says his favourite musical group is Perfume and he said his goal was to get AKB48 on Pitchfork after he had written about Hatsune Miku for the same site. Although he writes about the alternative on his Make Believe Melodies site, mostly in his coverage of the netlabel scene, it becomes very clear that he honestly does love J-pop and wants to spread it - the reviews he writes of mediocre Japanese albums are almost always new releases from groups or performers that he would love to have introduced in their prime, but without any reissues to write about he gets stuck having to cover an unimpressive one instead. Do I, personally, think an average Pitchfork reader (who likely came to the site to read up on the War on Drugs/Sun Kil Moon beef) is likely to find any value in going back and looking through Namie Amuro's back catalogue? Not really, but then again I wouldn't write about Hatsune Miku for that site either.

 

That last line though...

 

I am familiar with Patrick's work and have spoken to him several times. I do know that Perfume is his favorite act and that his areas of concentration are electronic music and idols. Perfume, Kyary, and Hatsune Miku are the convergence of both of those worlds, so him writing about them is no surprise.

 

But it's like, if you know it's mediocre, why review it? It's not as if it's a must do thing.

 

I do agree that fandoms can be very biased and blinded by love. But there are some fans who can see things for what they are. Those who criticize the flaws of their faves in an effort make them better. Those are the fans who should be doing it.

 

As far as what is presented, it's an interesting question that is often debated in the context of Cool Japan. Like supposedly Cool Japan is a thing, but there isn't that much outreach. People ask, what exactly are they pushing? It seems to be the things that they've been pushing forever, things that can be dubbed "weeaboo bait." But the thing is though is that those things aren't considered cool by the audience they're trying to reach. They're largely considered geeky. Cool Japan is clearly an answer to Hallyu, but you can't fight Hallyu with things that are considered geeky. There already is a bad perception of Japanese pop culture and Cool Japan is just cashing in on cliches. They're not presenting anything fresh. If would be interesting if they actually pushed things that are new and fresh inside of Japan, which would be the indie scene in part. You being a writer about Shibuya-kei, you know that years ago there was a pushing of coolness by the people in that scene internationally. That's been replaced by a pushing of "weeaboo bait."

 

One thing that personally annoys me about international fandom is that there are so many people who are stuck in a bubble when information about what is currently happening in Japan is more accessible than ever. The disconnect can be weird at times...

[MofShibuya]

That last line though...

 

I am familiar with Patrick's work and have spoken to him several times. I do know that Perfume is his favorite act and that his areas of concentration are electronic music and idols. Perfume, Kyary, and Hatsune Miku are the convergence of both of those worlds, so him writing about them is no surprise.

 

But it's like, if you know it's mediocre, why review it? It's not as if it's a must do thing.

It isn't a must-do, you are right. But, assuming one wishes to do so, how is one supposed to introduce readers to, say, Namie Amuro in a major venue otherwise? If I were to write a review such as this one, which is clearly intended to provide some background on "who this Japanese woman SOPHIE did a song for is", I would have made a greater effort to mention Amuro's better work, but we're discussing intent here - not the actual quality of what I'm pretty sure we both believe is a rather lacklustre review.

[DocumentaLy]

It isn't a must-do, you are right. But, assuming one wishes to do so, how is one supposed to introduce readers to, say, Namie Amuro in a major venue otherwise? If I were to write a review such as this one, which is clearly intended to provide some background on "who this Japanese woman SOPHIE did a song for is", I would have made a greater effort to mention Amuro's better work, but we're discussing intent here - not the actual quality of what I'm pretty sure we both believe is a rather lacklustre review.

 

I see your point.

[zahzah]

i think pitchfork did one review for Perfume and capsule too!