On Pitchfork’s “Punisher” Album Review by Hazel Britton Dansby

The Pitchfork review of the album Punisher by Phoebe Bridgers that came out in 2020 analyzes Bridgers’ new album, touches on specific songs and lyrics, as well as covers her inspiration, and growth throughout her career. 

The writer, Sam Sodomsky, uses strong verbs when describing Bridger’s writing and emotions to connect with his audience. He also refers to her past music multiple times, as well as the singer’s personal views to lure the audience into the piece. For example when he speaks on how “Her songs can be autobiographical—2017’s “Motion Sickness” bluntly described an emotionally abusive relationship with a since-spurned, one-time mentor—but her writing is too self-aware and wide-ranging to feel confessional.” Sodomsky deeply analyzes Bridgers’ creative voice as well. When speaking on her he says “This impulse toward the candid, the multi-dimensional, has also come to define the sound of Bridgers’ music.” which helps an unfamiliar audience have a better sense of her as an artist. 

The writer does seem to be slightly biased towards Bridgers herself. He speaks of her with high regards, commending her career and personality, but fails to provide any negative or neutral feedback on the album that he was reviewing. Instead he tends to go into rant-like spirals of praise. Therefore it created a critique that was less of a review on her album, and more of a review on her character.

Parts of this piece can offer as a good writing template for a critique. The writer had clear knowledge of the singer’s background and influences, as well as the background of certain songs and the inspiration for the album. Which gave an unfamiliar audience a greater opportunity to delve into the album. Also although his personal bias towards the artist created some inconsistency in the review, it did provide a true spark that brought the article to life. Overall it was a well executed piece that could provide as an exemplary template for a music review. 

Discussion Questions 

Do you think it is important to delve into the writer’s personal icons when reviewing an album?

Does an album critique provide a better review when the writer is biased towards the artist? 

On “Regina Spektor: Imagining a New World” by Lila Mankad

Regina Spektor: Imagining a New World

“This connection to God, to family, to waves of emotion, safety, and thought—that was what the piano represented.”

In this American Songwriter piece, the writer James Utti weaves an interview with Regina Spektor with a review of her new album, Home: Before and After. The piece begins with Spektor’s childhood immigration from the Soviet Union, and her early associations with music. It goes on to describe Spektors deep connection to piano and her family. Finally, after all of this background, the article analyzes the album, its songs, and Spektor’s views on how to listen to her albums. 

This piece uses a structure of talking about the songwriter’s background before exploring the album. The structure allows the reader to build a personal connection with Regina Spektor through personal stories about God and family. By the time the piece approaches the album, the reader already almost has a relationship with the music. The author builds this narrative using quotes by Spektor from an interview. Even when not directly talking about the new album, many of these quotes reveal something about her music. In one compelling quote, she describes how her mother and grandfather played piano, and how it “feels like a place” with “area codes.” This translates to her music, where piano plays a central role. While the piece doesn’t explicitly explore this as much as it could, similar quotes build the tone of her music throughout the piece. 

Utti also uses similes to draw different audiences in. He points out specific songs, and says they “stun like discovering a hidden amusement park in your backyard.” This specifically targets readers unfamiliar with Spektor’s music, who might be open to “discovering” her with this album. In the next paragraph, he describes the new album as “an eclectic patchwork like a ‘best of’ photo album of her years plunking away at the piano.” This simile appeals to veteran Spektor listeners, who already love her old music and are looking for more. 

James Utti does seem to hold a bias for Regina Spektor. The article fails to offer any critiques on the album, or Regina’s music in general. However, it seems he is aiming for more of a portrait of Regina Spektor with a side of new album discussion, rather than a full-on review. This somewhat excuses the bias, as it matches the genre, but there are still missed opportunities. Utti could’ve asked Spektor about perceptions of her music as unserious and too twee, or criticism of Home: as overly produced. This could’ve created a more nuanced and interesting portrait of her. 

This piece models how including the background of a song artist can contribute to a music writing piece. Often, people aren’t just listening for the sounds, they’re also listening for the artists. We (music writers at PVA) can incorporate Utti’s personal stories about Spektor to create connections of our own writing with the reader. 

Discussion Questions: 

1. How much of a role should the artist’s character and background play in a music review?

2. Do you usually listen to music for just the sounds, or also the artist?