Nirvana "Nevermind" = 20 year anniversary
downtownrobbrown
446 Posts
Overrated or underrated there's no doubt it changed the fabric of music. Boy this makes me feel old.
Comments
Rock radio ate itself.
I went on a Nirvana jag this summer. Still has the power.
I don't know if it actually "changed the fabric of music". There wasn't much about it, nor Nirvana generally, that was especially new. It was one of those "right band/right place/right time" confluences where being new or changing the fabric of music didn't really matter that much.
I know Nirvana and Nevermind in particular are considered "important", and I know why. Nevertheless, the whole grunge thing and just about everything connected with it passed me by completely. I had no interest in it whatsoever, and never felt as if I needed to feign interest for any reason. As a result, I found my way to Nevermind in my own time and at my own pace. It's one of those "landmark" records that can stand completely apart from whatever artistic or cultural context in which it's usually placed without being in any way diminished. If it were possible to find such a person, you could play Nevermind to someone who'd never heard a single note of it, nor had any idea that it ended up selling 30 million copies, nor knew that millions of people regard it as a musical gateway drug, nor that its principal creative force ended up blowing his brains out within three years of its release. You could do that right now, and I bet you they'd still think it was a fantastic record. And that's the only thing that matters.
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/2011/09/23/dust-it-off-nirvana-nevermind-20-years-later/
Also, 20th anniversary of Red Hot Chili Peppers' BloodSugarSexMagik
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/2011/09/24/dust-it-off-rhcp-blood-sugar-sex-magik/
and 20th anniversary of The Low End Theory
http://www.thisisbooksmusic.com/2011/09/24/dust-it-off-rhcp-blood-sugar-sex-magik/
Now my reply.
Did Nevermind really ruin rock radio? No. I feel the radio industry basically killed itself, and they had been doing that since the late 70's. Yes, Nirvana did become the cash cow of the early 90's, and since Kurt Cobain's death, the industry has hung on to their music as a means of making that money. As I said elsewhere, the album cover represented a mentality of "from the cradle to the grave", always grabbing for that cash lured in by an eternal hook. Nirvana knew what they were doing, but they are not at fault. Because everyone started jumping in on the bandwagon, major labels started signing not only every other Seattle and Pacific Northwest band that could make someone else a buck, but also anything that sounded and looked like Nirvana. When artists actually came out and said "yeah, we're alternative man", it sounded like an A&R man's nephew trying to help his uncle keep his joke. A lot of people saw through the bullshit, and while it seemed to end as quickly as it started, it was perhaps appropriate that the Nirvana buzz lasted less than three years. Then it became something else.
I don't know who does it nor care, but when I actually do turn on the radio and find some rock, there's that one sound that sounds like a completel rip of "All Apologies" but sounds like a mock-grunge ballad. Now there are Nirvana lunch hours, and they're now up there with Metallica with their "classic rock" status.
Mayble Metallica wanted that status, they celebrated their love of NWOBHM and Deep Purple, they were their idols. Nirvana looked up to The Wipers, Poison Idea, The Vaselines, and Sonic Youth, not exactly the fathers or grandparents of the Jonas Brothers. I mentioned a few weeks ago on how Frank Zappa said that the industry was better than it consisted of old cigar-chompers who knew nothing about what was cool, but because it was weird and unusual, it was signed, allowing a lot of non-normal artists to be heard and released. As the industry and radio shifted to the beast it has now become, there was no room for experimentation or risk, which is why all you hear and see is formulaic crap. Fans know where to go for something "other than", and that's what the industry fears, the fact that the public no longer has to conform to "all the hits and more". Jay-Z and Coldplay performing at a Clear Channel function? Who cares? Drake looking solemn on his new album cover? And?
Then again, it's all perception. I just don't feel Nirvana as a band set out to ruin anything but studio equipment and stage amps.