Pitchfork Names Radiohead's Kid A Album of the Decade

October 2, 2009 9:05 a.m. by Nick Neyland

Pitchfork has reached the end of its weeklong countdown of the top 200 albums that its contributors considered to be the best of this decade. There are few surprises in the top 10, except perhaps the lack of an Animal Collective album (although Panda Bear’s Person Pitch hits the number 9 slot). No one will be shocked to learn that Radiohead’s Kid A has topped the chart.

Jay-Z’s The Blueprint is the highest-ranking hip-hop album, coming in at number 5, while Daft Punk’s Discovery (which was originally reviewed by Pitchfork head honcho Ryan Schreiber) represents the world of dance music at number 3. Pitchfork favorites Outkast, who scored the site’s track of the decade with “B.O.B,” come in at number 13 with Stankonia.

Perhaps the most interesting fact is that UK bands performed so poorly—Radiohead’s album is the only record by a band from the UK in the whole top 20. In fact, there are only five non-North American acts (Radiohead, Daft Punk, Sigur Ros, the Avalanches, and the Knife) that make the cut, showing that Pitchfork has stuck very close to home in its choices.

The full top 20 looks like this:

01. Radiohead – Kid A

02. Arcade Fire – Funeral

03. Daft Punk – Discovery

04. Wilco – Yankee Hotel Foxtrot

05. Jay-Z – The Blueprint

06. Modest Mouse – The Moon & Antarctica

07. The Strokes – Is This It

08. Sigur Ros - Ágætis Byrjun

09. Panda Bear – Person Pitch

10. The Avalanches – Since I Left You

11. Ghostface Killah – Supreme Clientele

12. The White Stripes – White Blood Cells

13. Outkast – Stankonia

14. Animal Collective – Merriweather Post Pavilion

15. The Knife – Silent Shout

16. Sufjan Stevens – Illinois

17. LCD Soundsystem – Sound of Silver

18. Kanye West – Late Registration

19. Spoon – Kill the Moonlight

20. Interpol – Turn on the Bright Lights

Posted in: RADIOHEAD

7 Responses

October 2, 2009 at 9:22 a.m.

andross

I'm glad to see Turn on the Bright Lights there. I think because of what's happened since (the pretty good Antics the pretty bad Our Love to Admire) it's lost some of its luster. I was surprised at how high the Strokes were.

October 2, 2009 at 10:07 a.m.

J_bLo

Pitchfork has problems with underground hip hop.

October 2, 2009 at 12:17 p.m.

dukkookim

I agree on Interpol -Bright Lights was always my #1 for the first half of the decade. I'd still have it in my top5 but even with it's praise, it's become underrated. Personally, i think it's better than at least 7 of their top10.

October 2, 2009 at 2:29 p.m.

McEnroe

beck and waits made great observations about lists in their interview on beck's site. we're obsessed with having the best of everything, from cars to movies and music. these lists, ultimately they're just something so people can charge more. people are making arguments based on their own tastes (it's not really objective), and the bigger venue they have for sharing their opinion, the more authority we believe them to have. pitchfork writers aren't very smart when it comes to writing about music. it's a bunch of nerdy kids that read blogs and wikipedia all day as they listen to music. then they regurgitate variations of other bad rock reviewing. not only are rankings and lists obsolete--the whole record review format, the genre itself is dead, yet we keep pretending like it has value. why? because people are so good at selling us absolutely nothing.

October 2, 2009 at 2:29 p.m.

quickANDdead

arcade fire is an awful choice for the top 10. it's a band that pitchfork made popular. a turning point? musically? maybe. but not all turning points are good. if that album represents any kind of turning point in indie music, (along with the shins subsequent popularity after garden state) it was the point at which pitchfork solidified its status as a taste-maker and cultural force. it was the point it became clear what "indie" rock really is--a marketing scheme that exploits our desire to be seen as individuals, that sells hip awkwardness and alienation instead of physical beauty. but it still sells it, and under the guise of 'A'rt.

i find pitchfork's ranking obsession pretty idiotic. i actually think number rankings are obsolete and worthless. but arcade fire? number 2? the choice is so transparently self-serving. these lists give them the chance to justify what they've said in past years. they get to reaffirm their own authority so that they may continue in their role as chief constructor of the new rock and roll canon. but most of their picks suck, and they have obvious biases that they try to cover up by giving occasional nods to dance music, more so to hip hop, every now and then to minimalist composers, and rarely to anything related to jazz. what's worse, they speak in such generalities about music and 'what's good', but there are only 5 non-North American acts in the whole top 200. of course, they try to cover up this bias--hope we won't notice--by placing 4 of them in the top 10. as long as the top 10 looks diverse enough, no one will question the 'authority'.

October 2, 2009 at 9:12 p.m.