BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Nirvana

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Margin Walker
21:52 / 27.09.02
Of course it's not "new" per se, but Wicked Witch of the West (a.k.a. Courtney Love) lost a court case and the song "You Know You're Right" (http://www.1077theend.com/ has a RealAudio link on the top of their page) has finally seen the light of day. Also, a Nirvana box set is slated to be released later this year [coincidentally right about Christmas-time ]. So what do y'all think--is Nirvana still relevant? Or have they become nostalgic touchstones, like Bachman Turner Overdrive for thirty-somethings?

Yahoo AP story here
 
 
bio k9
22:14 / 27.09.02
Ugh. the End. Our own local antichrist. I really shouldn't be subject to that here. Damn you all to hell.

I downloaded this earlier this week and...its ok. I dont think it ranks among the top 10 Nirvana songs thats for sure. I was under the understanding that the case had been settled out of court and that a greatest hits package was going to be released (as opposed to a box set). As far as relevence, I think Nirvana are more like the Beatles or early Rolling Stones than BTO. Great songs, great albums but youve heard them so many times you don't really need to listen to the records anymore. But thats just me and might have something to do with where I live.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
22:54 / 27.09.02
Can someone please explain why they think Nirvana deserve the adulation that they've always been given? I'm not joking, nor am I saying this simply to provoke an argument, but I've never understood waht was so special about them. They seem to be worshipped because Cobain was both pretty and a fuck-up. In terms of the music, the argument that they were the first group to marry pop melodies to metal sounds just doesn't hold up, as others were doing it long before - Husker Du and the JAMC, to mention two.

I can enjoy their albums, but they've never really moved me in any great way.
 
 
moriarty
23:26 / 27.09.02
And while you're at it, tell me what's so bad about Bachman-Turner Overdrive.

BTO Rule!
 
 
De Selby
01:47 / 28.09.02
Nirvana is about the urge to self-destruct... I think it depends on the time you first heard them, and how old you were then, as to how good they are...
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
03:34 / 28.09.02
I think you might have to be American and to have been a teenager in the early 90s to fully grasp why Nirvana was so powerful and huge. A lot of bands have sounded sorta like them (though no one had Kurt's voice - about half of the appeal is Kurt's voice), but that's not the point. It's that Nirvana suddenly appeared in the mainstream and were genuine and real and had a very defined art-punk-indie aesthetic that somehow suddenly appealed to a huge number of people. It was like a sort of cultural moment of victory for some people, and for people like me who were just a little younger, it was something that set the tone for what was to come. In a sense, you really kinda had to have been there.

It really helps that Kurt was a very talented songwriter, too - I was recently going back over the Nirvana catalog after I heard "You Know You're Right", and yeah, all those songs still sound great even if most of them I've heard more than I'll ever really need to. In Utero and MTV Unplugged In New York are both extremely powerful, timeless recordings. I'll stand by the quality of those two albums for the rest of my life, I'm sure.

As for "You Know You're Right", it's pretty good, and it's been caught in my head here and there over the course of the week, but it's not Kurt's best work by any stretch. I wish that a properly recorded version of "Talk To Me" had surfaced, instead... that song is poptastic, and has the prophetic lyrics "the leader of the band is a mental hell/ I won't weather it well" before screaming "talk to me/ in your own language please". I like to think it's about Courtney.

If you want to download it, right click on this link.
 
 
ceridwen
04:29 / 28.09.02
ditto flux.

they were an eye opener to lots of kids who didn't know to look for more in music than hair bands. it may be that people just associate nirvana with the feelings invoked by some such expanded knowledge.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
09:31 / 28.09.02
Courtney wrote all his songs for him, you know.
 
 
Solitaire Rose as Tom Servo
09:46 / 28.09.02
As someone a bit older (and dispassionate about Nirvana) the reason they are so huge in my mind is because they were the reconnection of music to actual people.

At the time, Hair Metal was HUGE, with bands like Poison and Motley Crue doing the big stadium tours, dating supermodels, having music videos that made them seem like unapproachable gods, and the record companies were pushing an image of "Rock Stars As Larger Than Life" with songs about how rich they were, how women fell at their feet, etc...

And for the average teenager, it was a big image they knew they couldn't live up to.

Nirvana was a garage band gone big, they dressed like normal people (not spandx and two foot tall hair), sung about being upset and depressed without much knowing why, and playing guitar in a way that people could listen to and emulate. Much like the Ramones, they brought rock music back to normal people, making it accessable again. The stories about Nirvana weren't that they would have massive parties with models and limos, but how they trudged from club to club like working stiffs.

And, to be honest, when I look at all the manufactured music today (Mariah Carey, Whitney Houston AND Jennifer Lopez all have albums coming out this fall), I keep wondering where the new version of the garage band who kills the maufactured Rock Stars will come from...or if music has gotten so fractured that it can't happen again.

On a side note, does anyone see a paralell between rock in the mid 70's and hip hop now, where the big stars are SO over the top in how rich and famous they are that the kids on the street can't relate anymore, and a "punk" revolution is in the brewing there as well?
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
11:44 / 28.09.02
You know, yr right Solitaire - the fact that Nirvana's songs are all very easy to play helped a lot. I'm remembering back in high school when pretty much every person I knew who played guitar (most of them just starting out in some part thanks to Nirvana and the indie explosion) were learning "Lithium", "Come As You Are", "About A Girl", "Polly" and "Smells Like Teen Spirit". Everyone was making their own DIY t-shirts like Kurt. Looking for weird cultural things wherever they could find them. Music, OBSCURE MUSIC, was cool for everyone. Kurt may have been tragically handsome, but Nirvana was not about being good looking, and the same goes for many of their immediate peers. That's important too - you get your "garage rock revival" now, but everyone looks like models. I think the contemporary environment on the mainstream AND indie level really discourages less attractive people from playing music, being in bands.
 
 
videodrome
14:16 / 28.09.02
Solitaire, I don't think there will be another garage band that kills the plastics. That can only happen once. That Nirvana did it was a collusion of so many factors that it's an unrepeatable act.

Nirvana was one of maybe three people/bands, ever, that Changed Everything, and I'm going with Elvis and the Beatles as the other two. So much of current American popular culture can be traced to Nirvana, for better or worse. It started small, with "Smells Like Teen Spirit", inescapable. But you could see it ramping up, with other bands getting constant airplay, television and magazines, all media, following suit. Some of it was just that the time was right - the first Lollapalooza tour had already been more successful than imagined possible when Nevermind hit radio, but Nirvana managed to be a distillation of so many different aspects of dissatisfaction. A lot of this has to do with, as Solitaire said, the fact that they were real, or seemed like it, at least. For about two years, it almost seemed like we, as an audience and buying public, were going to exercise some control over what we were fed.

In many ways, it's unfortunate that Grunge was what so many people thought they wanted at the time, but it wasn't even that. 'Grunge' was merely a way of re-allocating power, it was a word that gave some control back to the media that had held it for long, and were desperately afraid of losing it. Grunge was record companies and television quickly learning how to sell Nirvana back to their formerly docile public. After the collective shock of Kurt's suicide wore off, you could almost hear the sigh of relief, like "well, that didn't work, thank god we can go back to making money our way again." But media learned a lot from Nirvana, some of which panned out well for the public, and some not. Record companies learned enough from Nirvana to know that dangling the band's legacy in front of other acts to come would be the surest way to insure that the money stays where the labels want it to. I would be very surprised if any of the big garage/pop/punk bands since Kurt died hadn't had "you could be the next Nirvana, you know," dangled in front of them as they signed the contract that, essentially, closed off the possibility of that ever happening.

My mind still reels as I take in media today, realizing all the time how much of it is directly related to or as a result of Nirvana. In 1990 metal and punk weren't used on television and in ads. You didn't hear the Ramones all over the place -- most people still didn't know who the fucking Ramones were. People were still afraid of Ozzy. Skateboarding was never seen on ESPN. Nirvana legitimized aggression, as opposed to attitude, which is all that was popularly purveyed prior to Nirvana. They opened a certain kind of honesty for sale, and in doing so allowed it to be co-opted, leaving us now with aggression without honesty. There would be no Extreme Sports without Nirvana, and certainly no XXX. I think they even sped the mainstream acceptance of hip-hop by demonstrating that there was a shitload of cash to be made in these 'underground' affairs. The long-range, ongoing effect of one fucked-up, suicidal, charismatic kid is remarkable.
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
14:37 / 29.09.02
To me it's only 'In Utero' that is worth a damn, 'Bleach' is dull, 'Nevermind' is getting there but in several places, mainly mid-album, there are a number of filler tunes with lyrics that were written about 5 minutes before the song recorded and utterly crap. 'in Utero' is where the band have finally worked out what they want to say and do. The 'Unplugged' album is the better of the live ones as, being more carefully prepared and recorded it's of better quality than the missable 'From the Banks of the Wishkah'.

Do they matter? The fact that Kurt had a unique voice helps. MTV seem to keep playing their Unplugged show. I don't think anyone over here would directly claim them as an influence except in a list with a lot of other bands, I don't know how true the claims are that most metal bands in America claim them as their reason for being...
 
 
Yagg
04:26 / 30.09.02
Nobody I knew was afraid of Ozzy before Nirvana. We were already laughing at his incoherent blah blah blah. And everyone I knew was aware of The Ramones, love them or hate them.

How "indie" is a band that puts out pristine, polished product on a major label? Their songs were easy to learn, yes, because they were shit musicians. They didn't just lower the bar of musicianship in rock music, they actually got out sledgehammers and beat it into the ground.

Did they change everything? Well, let's see. Before Nirvana we here in the States were awash in a sea of Poison, Bon Jovi, and such. Now we're awash in a sea of Creed, Nickelback and such. You tell me what the difference is. It's all shit to me.

I'm not denying they did a good deed by helping kill hair metal, but they didn't really change anything. The music industry merely made a course correction from the 'Straits of Hairspray' towards 'Grunge Island,' and from there into the 'Sea of Bands Who Continue To Redo Pearl Jam's "Ten,"' A sea that apparently has no end. If Nirvana hadn't come along just when the biz needed that "next big thing," someone else would have, and people would still worship that someone else, instead.

Having said all that, if you take them down off the pedestal and actually just listen to them as the absolutely unpretentious rock band everyone said they were, they have a few really good songs.
 
 
rizla mission
10:01 / 30.09.02
Aside from all the hype and fame and bullshit books and constant retreading and jabbering about zetgeists and 'speaking for a generation' etc., I still hold up Nirvana as pretty much the dictionary definition of a great band. And of course they'd have been just as great if they'd stayed on Sub-Pop and nobody had ever heard of them.

I'd be lying if I tried to claim I didn't play Nevermind everyday at age 12-15 and In Utero everyday age 15-17, and if I didn't admit that those two albums have been almost wholly responsible for laying down the foundations of my current musical taste. I'd also be lying if I denied that I still find them fucking brilliant. Anyone who thinks Nirvana were just a major label band for snotty MTV teenagers could really benefit from an in depth listen to In Utero - it's still a fantastically intelligent, uncompromising, honest album and, um, I'll love it till I die basically.

But as has already been pointed out in this thread, it's been a while since I actually put on a Nirvana record just due to constant over-exposure.

And I couldn't really give a shit about this new song and boxset blah, blah, blah. I just hate the media's constant retreading and reevaluating of about six bands in the entire history of music who are deemed "important" .. I wish Grohl & Novoselic would just issue a statement saying "OK, we've got shitloads of money already and nobody really needs this boxset of a band whose commercial possibilities have already been thoroughly exhausted, so why don't you all spend the money on some other good groups who could really do with your support instead?"

Not gonna happen though, obviously.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
14:20 / 30.09.02
Thank you, Yagg, for putting into words what I've been thinking for years.
 
 
videodrome
14:51 / 30.09.02
Yagg, you're saying that they "didn't really change anything", yet on the other hand they "didn't just lower the bar of musicianship in rock music, they actually got out sledgehammers and beat it into the ground". Which is it? Can't be both.

Regardless. Nirvana didn't intend to change anything; they were just a band. But the way they were recieved did change things. Nearly every rock band on American radio right now was either influenced by Nirvana or is signed because their A&R guy was influenced by the success of Nirvana. Either way, it amounts to the same thing.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
14:55 / 30.09.02
Actually, I don't think Yagg was saying "they didn't change anything".
 
 
deja_vroom
15:15 / 30.09.02
Listen here, you all. Nirvana wrote “Scentless Apprentice” (It’s Grohl’s, actually, but listen). “Scentless Apprentice” exists so that we know that Nirvana *meant fucking business*. They could go on and on with more Come As You Areness or Smells Like A Teen Spiritness, but they wrote In Utero, which had some of the most noisy, iconoclastic, raw, self-destructive songs I’ve ever heard. Yagg has a point when he said that stuff is pretty much the same as it was before these days. Now, Nirvana may have helped in shaping the current status of music industry the way it is today. In the long run, they were absorbed and lost some of their momentum, but that’s what happens to everyone. Don’t expect too much of a rock band. The system will always find a way of co-opting honest acts into herd-milking money making. To find where Nirvana’s greatest strengths are, you will have to come back and remember how it was when they appeared. Speaking for myself, I didn’t give a damn about rock then. Guns N’ Roses? That looked so stupid, so unreal, how could you relate to that? And then Nevermind came, because our generation… well, every generation needs a wake-up call. And we cannot rely on the oldest people telling us how it was like in the seventies with the Sex Pistols – we needed our own thing. Nirvana provided the means to that. I remember watching the “Hype” rockumentary, the Melvin’s guys laughing their asses off at the prospect of being interviewed by MTV, (which they were), because… that’s the sort of thing that *just didn’t happen*. Chirs Novoselic once said that an insider of the record industry had told him “You guys proved that alternative music can be a viable commodity” – which shows that already at that time the archons of the industry were already laying out their plans to make the most of that wave. It’s inevitable, it’s a cyclic thing. Perhaps we’re stuck in the middle of the disco-shit era, as Thom Yorke puts it. Which means we may look forward with hope to what’s about to happen.
Now do something useful, go listen to “Scentless Apprentice”. When the chorus starts, smash stuff. Repeat.
 
 
videodrome
15:18 / 30.09.02
Sure he was.

I'm not denying they did a good deed by helping kill hair metal, but they didn't really change anything.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
15:24 / 30.09.02
I think this is a better representation of his point.

Did they change everything? Well, let's see. Before Nirvana we here in the States were awash in a sea of Poison, Bon Jovi, and such. Now we're awash in a sea of Creed, Nickelback and such. You tell me what the difference is. It's all shit to me.

If Nirvana hadn't killled hair metal, someone else would have. I think the evolution of popular music would not be drastically altered had Nirvana never existed.
 
 
No star here laces
15:45 / 30.09.02
Nirvana never made a big impression on me.

However, just seeing the numbers of teenage kids wearing brand-new nirvana t-shirts and hoodies in London today, you'd have to say they're still relevant. I'd be really interested to know what these kids who're 14 now think of Nirvana in contrast to Slipknot et al which (I assume) they also listen to...
 
 
rizla mission
09:47 / 01.10.02
Listen here, you all. Nirvana wrote “Scentless Apprentice” (It’s Grohl’s, actually, but listen). “Scentless Apprentice” exists so that we know that Nirvana *meant fucking business*. They could go on and on with more Come As You Areness or Smells Like A Teen Spiritness, but they wrote In Utero, which had some of the most noisy, iconoclastic, raw, self-destructive songs I’ve ever heard.

Totally agree. There are moments on In Utero that are more extreme than anything else ever issued by a major label. You've got to love the process by which the 14 year old kids mentioned in Lyra's post are getting exposed to insanely distorted Albini produced noise and lyrics that sound like off-cuts from Naked Lunch era Burroughs..

..that is, assuming they're not just listening to "Rape Me" on repeat..
 
 
--
18:39 / 07.10.02
I liked Nirvana because they were a popular band that took some risks at least (like cross-dressing on stage, two guys kissing live, Cobain on the cover of the Advocate, etc.) Cobain had good taste in music too (Half-Japanese, Joy Division, the Raincoats, Butthole Surfers, Big Black, etc.) and he was into William S. Burroughs and Brion Gysin and stuff. They had some memorable tunes too "Lithium" and "Heart Shaped Box" in particular I enjoy.
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
23:00 / 07.10.02
I think you might have to be American and to have been a teenager in the early 90s to fully grasp why Nirvana was so powerful and huge.

I'd take issue with that, y'know.

I think you'd have to have been alive and kinda sorta just getting into music at around the time to get why they were so big. I know that I first started *really* buying music (before then it'd been tapes and going off what my parents had) around the time that Nirvana broke in the Antipodes. I was living in New Zealand at the time, and had been pretty much in a Pink Floyd phase; it was either that or what was on the Top 40 progs. Anyhoo, Nirvana blew in and blew in BIG there - it was the sort of thing that fundamentally changed the way I listened to music. That and the RHCP (whisper it) were pretty much what made me realise that there was other stuff out there, stuff that (to a mid-teen) was kinda dangerous and glamourous and fucked-up - yet with a streak of the normal, of weakness, of lameness running through it, too.

For all the effect they had, no, I don't think they're the greatest band ...evah! But I do think that they were solid, wrote pretty good songs, and captured the most monolithic drum sound in history on In Utero. And that's good enough for me. I rarely listen to them any more, but when I do, it feels good. And reminds me of when I woke up and started seeking out stuff on my own.

The machinations of the music industry are another matter entirely; there'll be insipid music no matter how groundbreaking other acts are. Vapid shite will sell to the bland, or to masochists; record companies know this and market to them, thus making arseloads of cash - Kurt's death and life didn't change that. It was only the case that because of the way the band (and by association/whatever, the Seattle scene) mushroomed, we got to see the industry at work in daylight, rather than in backroom grooming studios.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
23:48 / 07.10.02
That quote from Flux makes sense to me when it's followed up with:

It's that Nirvana suddenly appeared in the mainstream and were genuine and real and had a very defined art-punk-indie aesthetic that somehow suddenly appealed to a huge number of people. It was like a sort of cultural moment of victory for some people, and for people like me who were just a little younger, it was something that set the tone for what was to come. In a sense, you really kinda had to have been there.

Around the time that Nirvana were started to be hailed as the Next Big Thing, the UK already had a few fairly visible 'new' music movements of its own going on. This is undoubtedly more a sign of my then complete ignorance of any act not hailing from here, but already being hooked into something else when they splashed down is probably why they never made any impact on me.
 
 
Elijah, Freelance Rabbi
04:38 / 08.10.02
im curious what the surviving members of the band think of this

also, i hope they dont release a "new" album, because that reeks of Sublime.

::shudders thinking of videos with an ethereal Kurt Cobain hanging with Dave Grohl::
 
 
Bear
11:15 / 08.10.02
Track listing for the album has been released -

'You Know You're Right'
'About A Girl'
'Been A Son'
'Sliver'
'Smells Like Teen Spirit'
'Come As You Are'
'Lithium'
'In Bloom'
'Heart-Shaped Box'
'Pennyroyal Tea'
'Rape Me'
'Dumb'
'All Apologies'
'The Man Who Sold The World'




Found here :

Track Listing?
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
11:52 / 08.10.02
That tracklisting is so poor - not so much the track selection, though I can't quite fathom why "Been A Son" is on there, yet "School" and "Negative Creep" are absent. The flow is soooooooo wrong. Ugh. And, if it's a chronological thing, why in hell would "You Know You're Right be the FIRST track, and not the final?

Where the hell is "Aneurysm"?
 
 
Milky Joe
12:21 / 08.10.02
No offence to you Americans but I think in the years leading upto Nirvana making it big the music industry in the U.S. were a joke. The people at the big labels were scared of anything new and scared of anything they thought MTV wouldn't play. Then Nirvana turn up and blow away the charts at a time that the labels were looking more towards boy bands and middle of the road (industry friendly) rap stars. The same thing happened here in the UK at the end of the 70's when punk first exploded onto the scene.
The effect Nirvana had on the US (and world) music industry can not be underestimated. They came just in time and we should all be thankfull.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
13:11 / 08.10.02
Well, that's not entirely true.

Before Nirvana hit, there were a growing number of successful major label/large indie records from 'serious rock artists' on the airwaves - Jane's Addiction, Pixies, R.E.M., 10,000 Maniacs, Nine Inch Nails, Alice In Chains. It wasn't nearly as bad as some people make it out to be...
 
 
Milky Joe
11:23 / 09.10.02
Well, that's not entirely true

True to an extent though. It was the huge unit sales by Nirvana that encouraged the industry to be braver in the way they promoted bands like the ones you mention. Other than R.E.M. (who only became world wide stars after by making a very commercial album) the bands you mention did not make the same on impact on the industry (not the fans) as Nirvana.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
12:08 / 09.10.02
That's some interesting revisionist history. If you pay attention to REM's discography, Out Of Time was not an obviously mainstream record. It's not a typical mainstream pop album at all. "Losing My Religion" is hardly a formulaic hit single - it's a total fluke that that song ever became so huge. R.E.M. had released several records with much more obvious 'hits' on them prior to Out Of Time and Green - their success was that of grassroots fandom growing at a reasonable clip over the course of a decade.

I think it's also a big mistake to write R.E.M., Jane's Addiction, NIN, and the Pixies off so easily.
 
 
Milky Joe
16:45 / 09.10.02
I am not writing off any of those bands. Out Of Time may not be mainstream in the sense many would think but it was an easier album for the record companies to market to middle class buyers than any of there previous work. Living in the UK I had never heard much, if anything, about REM before Out Of Time made it big. I prefer some of there earlier work and some of there more recent work but it was the album 'Out Of Time', that the label got behind, that introduced me and many others to there music.
 
 
Jack Fear
17:30 / 09.10.02
Nah. In the States, at least, the R.E.M. sellout began two albums before Out of Time, with 1987's Document. That's where the band began its long association with producer Scott Litt; the drums got louder, and Stipe's enunciation got better. "The One I Love," "It's the End of the World As We Know It," "Finest Worksong"... it all starts there.
 
 
Hieronymus
13:06 / 23.10.02
*small bump* Seems some of Cobain's writings and diary entries are going to be released Nov. 4. I had no idea he had a painful stomach ailment. Could this be the reason he did himself in?

Pretty tormented bastard if any of this has any weight.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply