Author Topic: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana  (Read 7865 times)

grotty

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #15 on: August 18, 2004, 11:10:00 am »
I'd argue the all-time importance of Nirvana with anybody anytime.
 
 I realize there were many bands doing 'it' well before Nirvana (see Pixies), but Cobain was able to put it all together in a way that affected & galvanized an entire generation. It's one of only a handful of records that I can remember hearing at the time - not knowing what it was - knowing that I'd love it - and had to have it. It changed everything for me. Much the same way Kiss Rock N Roll Over did years before.  
 
 I'd agree that you could put a better list of songs together for the Pumpkins though. I'd start with these. In order of my personal preference:
 
 I Am One
 Siva
 Snail
 Mayonaise
 Bullet w/ Butterfly Wings
 Rhinocerous
 Tristessa
 Geek USA
 Muzzle
 Soma
 
 Upon further review - Gish still rocks ass.
 
 Smashing Pumpkins are also the only band I've ever seen do one of those small club tours after they had achieved arena type fame (I think VS was referring to this above). It really was something to behold - bringing all that stadium energy into a small 500 general admission joint. One of the few times the cliche "blow the roof off" may have been applicable.  They opened with I Am One & I was temporarily insane.
 
 ***************
 
 "And it's no secret that the way to immortalize yourself or your band is through premature death."
 
 A Turkish friend I once had used a quote something like this:
 Die young and create a beautiful ghost

kosmo vinyl

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 15221
    • Hi-Fi Pop
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #16 on: August 18, 2004, 11:16:00 am »
well it's all Canada's fault anyways   :D  
 
 here's a little story about a Vancouver band called 54-40
 who had a couple rocking records that leaned a bit to dark and moody side.
 they were a radio hit in Canada and the kids in Seattle heard it and liked it.
 And the influences creep into some of the bands sound.
 
 
 Now I heard 54-40 when they were a Canadian Rock Radio Staple.  And thought they were ahead of the pack at the time.  Their influences ran from R.E.M. to Midnight Oil.  Of course like all go rock bands they veer to a more country sound.  And like Blue Rodeo are ignored here in the states.
 
 Personally, 13 Engines live whupped Crushed Squash with both hands tied their back.  Shame they didn't write anything as lousy as "Trapped Like a Rat in Cage", otherwise they might have made a mark on the landscape.
T.Rex

mankie

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #17 on: August 18, 2004, 11:19:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Bollocks:
  They should be doing HOLE ten years later, because they were much better than Nirvana, never mind the Pumpkins.
uh who do think wrote those Hole songs... they bare a certain resemblence to Kurt's output and isn't interesting that Hole/Courtney has never been able to do anything good musically since Kurt died?  hell even billy who should have never been let of out of his basement couldn't ghost write for her.  and wasn't trent reznor in there as well? [/b]
All I'm saying is that I could quite happily sit through a Hole album but if you put me in the hands of the US military and wanted to torture and abuse me, simply start playing "Nevermind" and I'm spilling my guts before the first 20 seconds are up.

sonickteam2

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #18 on: August 18, 2004, 11:19:00 am »
see, the major disagreement that i have with Nirvana, and i guess this could go with anyone.
 
   is this..
 
   Did Kurt Cobain really bring it all together to influence a generation?  or did he influence the media and THEY influenced a generation?
 
    I am not positive that Nirvana didnt just happen to be the band that the media (radio,MTV etc) decided to use to change a VERY stagnant time in pop music.
   
   Was the world so ready for something new?  
 
    Living in Canada when all of this happened, i think had a little different perspective on the whole thing.  Kids werent listening to Nirvana so much, but everything that spawned from it.  
 
   In 1990 there was ONE place for underagers to see shows, by 1993 there was like 6.

Bags

  • Member
  • Posts: 8545
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #19 on: August 18, 2004, 11:20:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
  the posies = seattle best band
THAT is the truth...

sonickteam2

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #20 on: August 18, 2004, 11:21:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by Bollocks:
 to torture and abuse
they use your posts for that, actually.

kosmo vinyl

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 15221
    • Hi-Fi Pop
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #21 on: August 18, 2004, 11:28:00 am »
If you think about it all those hair metal bands that claim that Nirvana ended their careers, should be thankful.  It frozen them in time like all dinosaurs are.  It's not like they went away, in fact they are still probably as popular today as they were then.  Think of the new dreck that those bands could be releasing today.  Now they can go out and play shows for olde time sake with all the old hits and not produce anything new.
 
 Same thing happed with all the Prog Rock bands the Sex Pistols "took" down, like Yes, Moody Blues and Jethro Tull.  They still seem to bring in the crowds and money to play thier old stuff.
 
 Will in 20 years Franz Ferndinad get the same blame as Nirvana and the Sex Pistols?
T.Rex

grotty

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #22 on: August 18, 2004, 11:29:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
  see, the major disagreement that i have with Nirvana, and i guess this could go with anyone.
 
   is this..
 
   Did Kurt Cobain really bring it all together to influence a generation?  or did he influence the media and THEY influenced a generation?
 
    I am not positive that Nirvana didnt just happen to be the band that the media (radio,MTV etc) decided to use to change a VERY stagnant time in pop music.
   
   Was the world so ready for something new?  
 
    Living in Canada when all of this happened, i think had a little different perspective on the whole thing.  Kids werent listening to Nirvana so much, but everything that spawned from it.  
 
   In 1990 there was ONE place for underagers to see shows, by 1993 there was like 6.
I couldn't disagree more. Music had degenerated to such a point (all the third generation hair metal bands) that yes - the "world was so ready for something new."
 
 There's no way Nirvana was a media conspiracy. None of the media corps are that smart or saavy. They are only very capable of exploiting a sound/movement etc. after being shocked by its initial success - "everything that spawned from it." That's the real problem behind genre change moments like this. You know that for the next decade you're going to be bombarded with the next big knockoff & most times they are hardly worthy. Much to the detriment of all the other great music that still is actually being created. It happened with metal - "grunge" - rap-metal - and even rap & hip hop. That's what really is killing music. The general public's inablity to choose for themselves & to be lead by music companies only looking to maximize $$.
 
 Good thing we all know better!   :D

Bags

  • Member
  • Posts: 8545
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #23 on: August 18, 2004, 11:36:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
  Will in 20 years Franz Ferndinad get the same blame as Nirvana and the Sex Pistols?
More likely The Strokes, 'cuz that's how whacked things are...
 
 I completely agree with Grotty on the unlikelihood that Nirvana was a media conspiracy.  What did the media have in the game at that point?  Not that they didn't play a role in the precipitous rise and now-legendary reverance.

sonickteam2

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #24 on: August 18, 2004, 11:37:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by grotty:
 
 There's no way Nirvana was a media conspiracy.  
the first time i heard "smells like teen spirit" on the radio in 9/91 the DJ said "this is so exciting, this is THE next big thing in music right here, Nirvana"  I remember that to this day, and I've been told its the indentical thing said when first played on 99.1 WHFS.
 
   thats all I'm saying.

grotty

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #25 on: August 18, 2004, 11:42:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
Originally posted by grotty:
 
 There's no way Nirvana was a media conspiracy.  
the first time i heard "smells like teen spirit" on the radio in 9/91 the DJ said "this is so exciting, this is THE next big thing in music right here, Nirvana"  I remember that to this day, and I've been told its the indentical thing said when first played on 99.1 WHFS.
 
   thats all I'm saying. [/b]
That may be true...but-
 
 HFS was very different then. Not perfect - but not yet the media conglomerate bitch they are today.
 
 I'd also bet that it was later in the game by then. No doubt radio - labels - etc. are able to jump fairly quickly in their best interests onto an exploding sound. ("Not that they didn't play a role in the precipitous rise and now-legendary reverance." - Bags)
 
 In all fairness - maybe that was also said with some sincerity. I probably said the same thing to different people. It really sounded that different. And people were liking it. Reacting to it. It had to signal something was happening. Even if it was only the death of Warrant.

sonickteam2

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #26 on: August 18, 2004, 11:45:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by grotty:
  the death of Warrant.
thats the real reason i dont like Nirvana..
 
   :D

kosmo vinyl

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 15221
    • Hi-Fi Pop
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #27 on: August 18, 2004, 11:48:00 am »
and it was all those 4th generation hair metal bands that couldn't get a record deal to save thier life, who changed their clothes and "attitude" to become grunge bands.  
 
 The Strokes could be the group that causes the current genre "changes".  However, they certainly weren't not an organic success as lots of "promotional fees" were spent to get them on the airways...
 
 The White Stripes, get my vote, as they are more organic, having worked they way up the ladder much like Nirvana.
T.Rex

mankie

  • Guest
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #28 on: August 18, 2004, 11:58:00 am »
Quote
Originally posted by sonickteam2:
   
Quote
Originally posted by Bollocks:
 to torture and abuse
they use your posts for that, actually. [/b]
You know me, always eager to help Rummie and the boys.

bearman🐻

  • Member
  • Posts: 5461
Re: Pumpkins vs. Nirvana
« Reply #29 on: August 18, 2004, 11:59:00 am »
From what I know about Cobain, I can tell you he probably didn't want to be labeled the way he has been labeled by the media for the past 10 years. I think he felt so much pressure from all angles. I'm not sure Courtney Spungen helped matters either.
 
 As with all things new and exciting, they tend to fade once the clones creep in and try to cash in. But I think that Cobain really loved and cherished music in a way that only a real artist can. He was the real deal, trying to make music for the right reasons. But I think he knew and was able to foresee what his music had done to the industry, and yes, I really do think Nirvana's impact was that big. If you had to narrow it down to one factor or band, it was them. And he probably hated himself for it. I know I shouldn't psychoanalyze him, but in a way I think it just makes sense that Cobain realized that he had helped create (or at least make popular) "alternative rock" as a major genre. Lollapalooza demonstrated that there was indeed an audience there.
 
 But to paraphrase Johnny Rotten, if you want to stop being a rock star then just STOP. It's that simple. And I believe that it's true. In my opinion, Nirvana happened because they were at the right place at the right time. So many brilliant pieces of music never get heard on a large scale because people aren't ready to listen. Cobain's legacy will always live on because of how he sealed his fate. Like all great art and artists, death at one's peak guarantees immortality. And as a result, those artists become legends. So there ya go. His music still holds its own, of course.
 
 And for the record, yes, the Pumpkins in concert made some people lose their shit as well. "I Am One" live and "Silverfuck" always went over big. I do miss those shows back in 1993 and 1994. They were really soemthing.