Line Out Music & Nightlife

Slog

News & Arts

« Brad Kaufman (formerly of Ice ... | Today In Soundgarden News: »

Monday, January 7, 2008

Nirvana vs. Everyone Since: Is It Even A Contest? (Or: Why Does it Matter?)

posted by on January 7 at 13:15 PM

This post on la2day.com has been making the rounds (at least enough rounds to get back to me). It’s about whether or not, in the past 10 years, there’s been a band as important as Nirvana. The writer, Matthew Sidney Long, seems to think there hasn’t.

I repeat my challenge: Please name me a band over the past 10 years who has come close to Nirvana in sheer impact and talent since Kurt put shotgun to mouth above garage in 1994? (and, I’m not talking about some indie band that hardly anyone listens to or some ring-tone fueled, Top-40 creation who no one will remember in 6 months. I’m talking IMPACT here, people. Combining art AND commerce. Both big AND authentic. Dig?).

Here, I’ll even help you out -

Let’s see…
RADIOHEAD, sure, I’d put them on this short list.
KANYE WEST, definitely, he’s doing some of the coolest and most innovative stuff in music today.
OUTKAST (when they were going good there wasn’t a better group on the planet).
U2.
LIL WAYNE.
RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS (sometimes).
ALICA KEYS.
FOO FIGHTERS (there’s that drummer again).
EMINEM.
OASIS.
PRINCE (when he wants to).
???

Read the full thing here.

But here’s my beef: What’s the point of answering this question? It’s a matter of opinion, so it can’t be answered (that’s the obvious issue), but putting that aside, why should we continue to compare today’s bands to the legacy yesterday’s bands left behind?

You can’t deny the cultural impact Nirvana had on the world, it’s true, but is it fair to say, say, Green Day hasn’t had as much of an impact (in a different way)? Love ‘em or hate ‘em for it, they brought pop punk to the masses. It’s a different genre, a different kind of impact, but historically, the band fronted a big shift in the music industry, the culture, and blah blah blah. They’re still alive, though. No one in Green Day has killed themselves.

And M.I.A. She’s making some waves, making people think, wearing funny pants—but she’s way too new to the scene for anyone to say whether or not she’ll go down as an untouchable in music’s history. She could pull a Britney next week. She could become a joke.

So say there isn’t a band as important as Nirvana. Say no one can answer that question. So what? So no band is important? Modern music sucks? The world is ending? Nirvana wasn’t as great as the Beatles. So you know what? Fuck Nirvana. Their impact wasn’t as strong as the Beatles’, so no band is as important as the Beatles, so no band, not even Nirvana, matters. How you like them apples?

To try and then to fail to answer this question feels to me like trying to prove whether music still matters at all. And it does, of course. Who cares if it’s as important as Nirvana was to the masses? That doesn’t mean it’s not as important to me personally. And hell, maybe I’m being selfish, but that’s all I really care about.

RSS icon Comments

1

The Big Bang vs Everything Since: I am Pulling My Fucking Hair Out! (Or: Why?!?!?!!!)

Posted by Eric Grandy | January 7, 2008 1:23 PM
2

there hasn't been a band so overrated since nirvana.

Posted by bp | January 7, 2008 1:42 PM
3

@1--that comment reads like the title of a flaming lips song.

agreed that this is a pretty stupid challenge from a writer looking to provoke. its ultimately a pointless exercise bc he begins w the premise "im right and youre wrong so there." makes me wanna bitchslap the guy with a public enemy record.

Posted by jz | January 7, 2008 1:48 PM
4

what the fuck is going on with the authors picks? lil wayne? SERIOUSLY? how can prince be on a list of people in their prime after nirvana? how can you respond to a challenge made by a person who wouldn't know if someone gave them the right answer?

also:
m.i.a. (2007) = fischerspooner (2002)
electro-punk-rock 4 evur!

Posted by cosby | January 7, 2008 1:53 PM
5

Soooo boring. Any comment that begins with 'There will never be another band like..." is boring. These people really should listen to Thou Shalt Always Kill on repeat until that silly hero worship thing is driven right out of their heads.

Posted by rk | January 7, 2008 2:00 PM
6

What I don't understand is how completely this "article" has made the rounds on the internet. I've read about it from no less than 4 completely unrelated websites at this point.

Posted by T | January 7, 2008 2:01 PM
7

Obviously this writer has not yet heard of the Coconut Coolouts.

What a pitty.

Posted by Jeff | January 7, 2008 2:09 PM
8

This dude's premise and his shortlist are both fucking embarrassing.

Posted by Eric Grandy | January 7, 2008 2:21 PM
9

"How you like them apples"

I love you Megan S.

Posted by haha | January 7, 2008 2:28 PM
10

The Strokes!

Posted by s | January 7, 2008 2:36 PM
11

Some girl on the metro tried to tell me that Nirvana was bigger than the Beatles and John Lennon was far less influential on the world than Kurt Cobain. I was tempted to correct her, but then I noticed her Red Hot Chilli Peppers t-shirt and decided there is no accounting for taste.

Posted by jewritto | January 7, 2008 2:43 PM
12

Radiohead is the only band that matters. How many bands out there ape their sound? Tons. Are there any other bands that could possibly change the course of how music is commodified, all the while making record companies and journalists take a shit in their respective pants at the possibilty of *cough* "free" music? No.

Posted by ..... | January 7, 2008 2:53 PM
13

Impacted be damned, I prefer Nirvana to everyone on that list, except maybe Prince.

I even like "In Utero" more than any Beatles album save "Revolver". "Platic Ono Band" trumps them both though.

Posted by tallchris | January 7, 2008 3:09 PM
14

this coming from someone who hawks the lashes?

Posted by ahah | January 7, 2008 3:10 PM
15

I'm happy to refer to my Cobain moratorium on this one: http://lineout.thestranger.com/2007/11/poor_kurts_shit

Posted by Sam M. | January 7, 2008 3:52 PM
16

The Spice Girls had more of an influential world-wide impact than Nirvana. This question is dumb.

Posted by *gong* | January 7, 2008 4:21 PM
17

Spice World FTW!

Posted by Eric Grandy | January 7, 2008 4:22 PM
18

spice world ftw = this is a spice world and fuck it?

Posted by cosby | January 7, 2008 4:50 PM
19

Somewhere in China, some band (that we'll never hear about) is the most important band since Nirvana.

Posted by anna | January 7, 2008 5:09 PM
20

Alicia Keys? Ah ha ha ha seriously?

Posted by laterite | January 7, 2008 5:57 PM
21

My band is the only band that matters. I'll start it soon ... and like we will make a huge impact on the world ... better than MOOP.

Posted by OR Matt | January 7, 2008 8:10 PM
22

Yeah ... damn I totally ruined it. But I Faith +1 is the band that really changed the universe.

Posted by OR Matt | January 7, 2008 8:11 PM
23

Nirvana will always remain one of my favorite bands of all time.

As far as impact on my own personal life, I think Nirvana came close to the Beatles, but not close enough. Nirvana motivated me to rebel, The Beatles motivated me to see what drugs were all about.

With that being said, I agree with Everett True's assessment in his book that musically, Nirvana has yet to influence anything but crap. Bush, Oasis, Seven Mary Three, etc, etc, etc.

Posted by godsactionfigure | January 8, 2008 1:29 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).