A lot of critics praised the performance, though. How important is it for you this time around, if at all, to have that critical praise?

Love: Well, I don't really read reviews. I read, like, David Fricke [of Rolling Stone], I read Robert Hilburn [of the Los Angeles Times]. I read [Jon] Pareles [of the New York Times]. Pareles gave me a pretty good review, actually, which he's never given me a bad review. He wrote something on the case against Coldplay. So vicious. But [his Hole review] was like, "Swagger. Incorrigible. A star." And that was his Twitter. I was having this huge identity crisis and the reason I know about the case against Coldplay is because I'm friends with Chris Martin and Gwyneth [Paltrow], and [Gwyneth] told me about it. I would never use someone else's misery to make myself feel better, but I was having an identity crisis, so this is how important it is: At three in the morning, I pulled up the 'Case Against Coldplay,' read it aloud to my friend and then I read my review next to it. I felt better! Which is a horrible, horrible, horrible thing to say. The New York Times matters. Otherwise, the rest of them, I don't give a s---.

 

Taken from: http://www.spinnermusic.co.uk/2010/04/22/courtney-love-hole-new-album/

 

And here is 'The Case Against Coldplay' article from 2005:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/05/arts/music/05pare.html

Well...I will never understand why Kurt Cobain married this woman. She's getting more and more bitchy and crazy. It's a little pathetique to do that :P

i wouldn't really call it crazy to be honest ^

 

Most people do something similar,

after being giving a grade or mark on something

When we don't a get a mark we're completely happy with,

we compare and contrast against other people in the class

and we ashamedly feel better with our mark when people have lower than us.

 

 

 

 

 

or maybe that's just me.

I think she's crazy too, but in this case I think what she's trying to say is: if coldplay (she must like the band) can take a beating from the nyt, then the fact that she was reviewed positively means she's really not bad. That's how I read it but the way she said it made it sound wacky though.

^ Hmm...That's posible. Maybe the "crazy" thing was just my hate for her speaking:confused:

I'm just surprised they're all friends...

That's not crazy at all. If you're going to read anyone's reviews you should read enough of them to understand where that person or publication is coming from because they have biases and styles whether they want to or not. Reading other reviews, especially the negative ones lets you see what those biases are and where exactly it is they are coming from.

 

Look at what pitckfork wrote about Viva era stuff. It has low marks, but it's actally very high for a mainstream accessable album for Pitchfork. And then you compare what they say to other reviews and you realize what they're saying about Viva is practically glowing compared to other mainstream reviews. But most people would look at that 60 and think they didn't like it.

:stunned: poor Frances Bean.