Loading ...I Put A Stop To Those Who Hate
By Evan ~ June 19th, 2007. Filed under: indie, rant, world news.
Here’s a funny article from The Guardian, a UK “news source.” In it, several music industry folks are asked to name their favorite “great records” that they find to be boring or unworthy of the acclaim heaped upon them. I take umbrage at a few of the people who offered their impressions of various records.
For example, Wayne Coyne of the Flaming Lips has this to say about Nirvana’s Nevermind: “[It] had a poisonous, pernicious influence. It legitimised suffering…Even the album cover seems cheap: that stupid dollar bill just seems to have been airbrushed in there. If Alice in Chains had done it, we’d have thought it was a joke, but because it was Nirvana we thought it was oh-so-clever. If you think you’re going to hear an utterly original, powerful and freaky record when you put on Nevermind, as a young kid might, Christ you’re going to be disappointed. You’re going to think, ‘Who is this band that sounds just like Nickelback? What are these drug addicts going on about?’”
There’s no denying Nevermind has been tainted by critics (and Butch Vig, zing!), and most people who grew up with Nirvana came to enjoy the other records (for me, it is In Utero) more. But I don’t like the way Coyne makes his argument. Aside from the fact that poisonous and pernicious mean the exact same thing, I’m unsure about his use of the word “suffering,” because as far as I know, musicians have written about negative experiences since the beginning of time. Classical composers found inspiration in hopelessness. Beethoven was one of the original romantics, and his teacher Haydn was at the forefront of the minor-key driven “storm and stress” movement. What about the blues? No suffering in the blues, right? And nobody suffered in rock ‘n roll until Kurt Cobain? Yeah, I guess that statement makes sense. I assume writing the sappy “Do You Realize” song about death has nothing to do with suffering, either. Also, the closing remark, “what are these drug addicts going on about” is almost laughable coming from an acid case whose drummer almost had to have his arm amputated due to his heroin addiction. I guess prattling nonsensically is fine as long as you look like hippie and not a junkie.
Somebody named Alex Kapranos, from the band Franz Ferdinand, said this about Marquee Moon: “What annoys me is the way people pontificate over the album; it’s one of those staples of student halls of residence. People wax lyrical about it, but the reason it’s so popular is because it’s a prog rock album its okay to like. Because the words “punk” and “New York” and “1977″ are associated with it, it’s deemed cool. Really, though, they’re a band who give guys who like 20-minute guitar solos an excuse. They were the Grateful Dead of punk, and I always hated all that jam-band stuff. They have the ethos of a jam-band but the aesthetic of a New York outfit. If anything, the Strokes took the look of Television, the aesthetic – and the Converse sneakers – and ignored the jam-band aspect. They took those first 10 bars of Marquee Moon and did something great with it!”
I don’t care if you want to disagree with a record in the punk canon, but this is clearly not the record to choose. I think it is one of the five finest recordings (technically) I’ve ever heard, and the band’s musical proficiency is what sets them apart from their garage-rocking peers. It’s a good thing, not a detriment. Is eight tracks at forty-five minutes really a “jam band” record? And if Kapranos really feels like the Strokes are better than Television he’s a fucking moron. Either way, if you’re in a post-punk band like he is, it’s probably not the smartest thing in the world to insult a band considered to be one of the principle founders of post-punk.
Fittingly (and perfectly, I might add!) Ian Williams (ex-Don Cab, current Battles-er) wrote about The Strokes: “The Strokes were just rich kids from uptown New York; the children of the heads of supermodel agencies who formed a rock band and thought they deserved respect because of that. Suddenly the downtown, older form of punk rock got co-opted by the system. If ever there was a point where Gucci and rebellion were married together, it was right there. The Strokes have, basically, been responsible for five or six years of a new form of hair metal, in the guise of something more tasteful. Their music is post-9/11 party music because it came out that week and everybody wanted to dance. They’re seen as the rebirth of rock in the UK – but it’s a very conservative, old-fashioned idea of rock for the 21st century. As for their punk credentials, I’m not going to say anyone’s more authentic than anyone else … But the Strokes are the new Duran Duran; the new decadence for the new millennium.”
Ian, I love you. The next time I see the new Battles record I’ll buy it just to make your next royalty check that much richer!
