Nevermind and Screamadelica turned 25 this past weekend

>I took Harvard's test for bias based on race and I'm not biased toward any race
lmao

they gave screamadelica a 9 last year when it was reissued for its 15th anniversary. Why would they do it again for its 16th? Do you expect them to address it every year?

>he will still claim i pulled off a photoshop job in a little over a minute

implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html
You can take it

Taking a test of questions wouldn't prove that. Real instincts in real life situations do. Even then, you're biased toward yourself so it's always hard to "really" know.

YESS THE NU MALES AND BLACKS ARE DESTROYING PRECIOUS AMERICAN CULTURE REEEEEEEE MAKE IT GREAT AGAIN

mama's gun is far better than that rockist garbage

besides what the fuck could pitchfork say about nevermind that hasn't already been said

They've posted quite a bit about Nevermind.

>yeah don't listen to these fags from Harvard, they don't know shit, I'm the REAL authority on racism
off yourself

>nevermind
>good

Slint, MBV and Mercury Pleb all had better albums that came out that year. Let alone fucking royal trux the year before

Nevermind and Screamadelica have already been reviewed when they were reissued years ago you dumbshits. Of course they're influential, but why write a second review about the same shit?

The test kind of is based on instincts. It tests whether you're likely to associate negative words with black faces without thinking about it

Good, they ignored shitty pop rock and shitty funk garbage

/thread
Badu is fantastic anyway

>and wasn't influential at all
Are you serious?

Also, have you even listened to it?

>an album was released a certain number of years ago
>everyone must discuss it

Mama's Gun was a really good album though...

They reviewed Nirvana on its 20th anniversary when it was reissued. Are they supposed to write a new review every 5 years?

They already reviewed reissues of nirvana records and have given Nevermind and In utero 10's. Why would they have to do it again?

Who knows :^)

There's no connection here
To the thread, the image, everything. Quit reaching.

this
and this

They already reviewed both of those albums, you absolute mongoloids. Is this really that hard to figure out?

> I took Harvard's test for bias based on race and I'm not biased toward any race.
Is this a meme? When did this start it's pretty funny.

they've already reviewed nevermind several times, and its already a talked to death album. the entire point of the classic reviews was to talk about less known classic albums.

Do you think they'll ever review Deathconsciousness?

Let me guess.

OP didn't listen to the album, he just saw a black woman and sperged out.

Badu didn't influence jack shit. Lauryn Hill was the sole proprietor of the resurgence of that sound.

except this album was waaaay more jazzy and deep sounding and less pop than the lauryn hill album

It's a reflection of "indie music" press in general at the moment. If you're white (and god forbid if you're male on top of that) you're going to have to be 50 times better than a minority artist for you to have any credibility for those dipshits. It's fashionable at the moment and they have to go along with it or alienate their fanbase.

It's pretty undeniable there's an agenda at play here, buddo

oh god my entire week is ruined what am i going to do? why would pitchfork, the god of music review websites, do this to us? tears streaming down my face as i close my excel spread sheet with all their review scores

i need to go lie down i just can't take it anymore

It's a good album!

And fuck Nevermind.

Pitchfork shills are the best. You can look at the site once or twice a year and get a roundup of every single thing that trendy people are going to be listening to that year.

Who is this cum guzzling sexual goddess of desire?

lol you are retarded. apples and oranges my friend.

I think the point is no one would question you until you draw attention to it. But I don't really care, I hate pc