Give me a break, writing her off as a Pitchfork artist? I could understand her voice or quirkiness putting off a lot of people, but she shouldn't just be labeled another generic indie act. In a lot of ways, Joanna Newsom couldn't be further from what typical indie music has been for the last 20 or so years. Lumping her in with shit like say, Frans Ferdinand is like saying all electronic music is the same. There is absolutely no relation other than the Pitchfork connection, but contrary to how some make it seem, "Pitchfork" is not a genre.
Not all supposed 'indie" artists sound alike, any more than all electronic music does. But come on, I shouldn't even have to make such an obvious statement.
I'm starting to notice a kind of electronic, reverse form of rockism in some people. "If it's not futuristic, and a COMPLETE and radical departure from all music that's come before, then it has absolutely no relevence..." Sheesh, if you hold so strongly to such biased (and IMO off point) rules on how important and new music is supposed to sound, then you might miss out on some of the truly vital and important music that's actually happening right now. Besides, the irony in such a stance is that techno and electronic music is nothing new either. Personally, I too would love to see music make another radical leap like it did with hip hop or jungle, but sometimes the progression isn't always in the warped, futuristic way that techno, hardcore, and jungle accustomed us to expect it to happen.
Of course it's all opinion and I respect everyone for having their own, I certainly have mine.
Swears, I respect your modernist idealism in a way, but if ALL music just went completely synthetic, cyber, and futurist, things would get really fucking boring and stale, just like it would be unpleasant if the whole world got paved over. We still need some trees here and there to balance it out IMO.