Kurt Cobain

to the second choice, but it still works - he wasn't terrible, he was passable,a nd had some good hooks.

But ultimately, not a very important musician except that, for some reason, he's gone into the "really important" meme.

Every now and again that happens, that someone who shouldn't be famous or influential somehow sneaks through and ends up with that title, in which the performer (or writer, actor, inventor, whatever) is given props by the next group of people only because the previous group of people gave them props, who gave them props only because they heard other people giving them props... and so on and so on and so on.

We see this a lot in the world of pop music, such as New Kids, Brittney, N'Stink, etc.

I give him more credit than he probably deserves because he was popular and unpolished. He seemed real and people like that sometimes someone like the Joe next door (with pink hair) can force their way into the limelight.

...I was born just a year before Kurt Cobain, and I never felt that he was speaking for me. :shrug:

...a so-so guitar player and a crummy singer. I wouldn't call him a voice of his generation, but he certainly didn't suck.

A lot of people think it's cool to dog Nirvana as overrated.

They had a lot of insanely dumb fans, but they were amazing and wrote amazing music that will be around for long time. Most important band since the Beatles, and they were better than the Pixies...even though they were influenced by them and Killing Joke.(I listen to all 3 bands..)

And who cares if Kurt couldn't wank on the guitar like Satriani...I hate that shit. He could strum one chord and you would immediately be crushed with exactly what he was feeling. Millions of people attempt that and can never achieve it. Add to that Grohl who is one of the most amazing and underrated drummers of all time, and Krist who was an incredible bassist...it was like a chemical reaction.

And to just write him off as a junkie is to ignore that half of your favorite artists are probably junkies as we speak.

He was a genius, in my opinion and the best songwriter I have ever heard in my entire life. He had a gift.

Word.

Even more odd that Dave Grohl played the drums on KJ's amazing new disk, huh? Especially since Jaz Coleman once entertained suing Nirvana for copping the riff from "Eightees" for "Come As You Are".

However, I still admit that I like Nirvana. The songs are good, the playing is good, etc. Strangely enough, I'm one of few people I know who like "In Utero" the best of their studio LPs they released why still a unit.

Ah, what can I say, I guess I'm "Old Skool" for the most part. "Teen Spirit" came out the year after I got out of college, so it was fairly familiar territory as far as I was concerned.

I was mostly out of the white-boy indie-rock scene by then, and the whole 90's "alternative"/"grunge" thingy to me seemed like just so much glam-metal, except without the clever lyrics, the hooks, the wankety guitar solos, the bad hair.........kinda like Smashing Pumpkins! :O

>>Most important band since the Beatles

Wow, yeah, you lost me there.

Maybe the most important band since Led Zeppelin or the Sex Pistols....

>>He was a genius

For Genius please see Frank Zappa...

Look, I've listened to punk, indie, underground, grunge whatever the hell you want to call it since the early to mid 80's. Nirvana's lyrics were borderline nonsensical. Which is fine, but it surely doesn't make them the voice of a generation.

He was a sloppy guitar player. Which is fine. So was Paul Westerberg, so was Bob Mould at times. So was Frank Black. All of whom were much better at what they did than Cobain was.

Nirvana recorded 3 albums, most of their songs relied on the same formula (soft verse-loud-chorus-soft verse-loud chorus-guitar solo-soft verse-loud chorus). 2 of the biggest songs on their breakthrough album were simply recycled riffs from other bands(Teen Spirit is pretty much just a sloppily played version of More than a Feeling by Boston, and Come as You are is an admittedly slowed down version of Killing Joke's "Eighties").

I don't hate what Nirvana did. I was excited when they became popular because it was clearly better than what was on the radio at the time. It was more of a cultural milestone than a musical one though and they were simply in the right place at the right time. Important? Yes, to a degreee they were. But nowhere near to the degree that gets hammered on in the press and by a lot of people. Maybe if you had never heard of the Replacements, or Husker Du, or the Meat Puppets or the Pixies or Black Flag or any number of bands before you heard Nirvana, then it would sound revolutionary.

>>He was a sloppy guitar player. Which is fine. So was Paul Westerberg, so was Bob Mould at times. So was Frank Black. All of whom were much better at what they did than Cobain was.

As well as Zoso...Jimmy Page

Comparing the different styles and song structures on any Zeppelin album with anything in Nirvana's catalog......

..and I'm not even a classic rock afficianado.

I was in no way comparing Cobain's style to Page's...just adding to the list of sloppy/good.

HAD never heard of any of the punk and post-punk bands and that is what makes Nirvana important on some level. I think they made a really big impression on people who would never have boticed any of their influences. Popular bands like Nirvana and Green Day built a bridge to a lot of great music for an audience that might never have noticed. And the rawness and honesty of his voice is very appealing.

Although I am not a big fan of theirs ( wrong generation on some level) I think Cobain and Nirvana deserve the kudos that they get. On a personal level, I feel sorry for him, since he was so clearly a very tortured and depressed soul with great potential who took his life. And leaving a child behind, to me, as a parent, is an extremely sad and selfish act.

JMO

They did pay respect to their influcences and more obscure peers and that led kids to seek them out.

Unfortunately, I would say that it also more or less killed underground rock. Now people view indie labels as the farm leagues and a stepping stone to bigger things. Bands have publicists and PR people and hire marketing firms. That is insane to me, and not entirely a good thing.

For a brief period from '92 to '96 mainstream music was exciting as a result of some of these bandse getting press and play, and people were being challened. IN this respect Nirvana was a good thing. But quickly the tastes of the American public turned back towards the simple and the pedestrian.

days when it was considered uncool to even MAKE a record! I know lots of indie folk who continue to labor despite it being unlikely that they will ever go to a major and being happy with an indie label or their own. Also there are also bands that will go up to the mainstream and maybe make more people curious. Hard to say.

Although I am not a fan of Cobain or his music, he and his band did leave a big mark on people of the time.

and there's a lot of circumstantial evidence indicating he may have been murdered.
Cobain saved us from the likes of Poison, Warrant, Vanilla Ice, New Kids on the Block, and others of their ilk. We need another one. In Rolling Stone this week, the magazine highlights the most influential figures in rock music. In her assessment of Patti Smith, Shirley Manson of Garbage said that we're in sad shape when Christina Aguilera is a rebellious figure. Isn't that the damn truth.

Unfortunately, Nirvana paved the way for tons of faceless, flannel-wearing, untalented white kidz with garage bands that pretty much destroyed the indy-rock scene in the 1990s. After Nirvana, the only way for an indy-minded group to get signed was to crank the amps to eleven, wear a flannel and scream about how shitty you feel. There was a lot of cool, quirky and interesting stuff happening in the indy scene in the early 90s that was pretty much ignored because of the push to sign "the next Nirvana".

If he's the voice of a generation it's a generation of pussies. Nirvana brought in the whole whiny, bitchy trend of woe-is-me pussy music into vogue.

I think you successfully explained something I was never able to put my finger on about much of the grunge music.

....much better than I..thank you!!!:* :loveya:

and someone that connected with a lot of people for whaetver reason - unfortunately he was also a guy that suffered from depression and like a lot of heroin addicts said he used smack to "relieve" it - he didn't, he used it because he was a junkie and the "I'm suffering" reason sounds better than "I'm weak and I actually like the heroin"

It's strange for me to think now that he was younger than I am now when he died, that just seems really young, maybe if he'd waited a bit longer he'd have found the strength to get over himself, having your parents divorce really isn't that big a tragedy and eventually when he consigned the drugs to his youth he might have seen that. Oh well whatever, nevermind.

Not at all....

Great Artist? Couldn't see that myself. If you want a tortured artist / dead too soon myth, Jeff Buckley is much more deserving of your attention. Nirvana were an indie group who were bland enough and Kurt's anger was unfocused and apolitical enough to sell millions of units to kids. That's all there is here. Nirvana were a tenth the band The Pixies were, and for dynamics and songwriting are made to look like rank amateurs by Radiohead. As for great songwriters, Kurt doesn't make the top one hundred. I could not quote one lyric of his that would hold up against Dylan, Lennon or even Black Francis. Kurt was a good looking guy who fulfilled all the cliches of rock martyrdom and left a good looking corpse for people who feel the need to buy into the tortured-artist myth. If he really was, as he claimed, furious at the commercialization of his art, he could have used his rarified commercial and artistic position to fight back against the commodification of rock music. Hell, even Pearl Jam managed that.
In fact, as much as I dislike Pearl Jam, I have far more respect for Vedder over Cobain. I have much more respect for those who choose to fight and make a stand, rather than accept their failings. Show me a tortured artist who died tragically young, and I'll show you a Neil Young, a David Bowie, hell, an Iggy Pop. If you want the rock martyr myth, fine. I'll take the rock survivor myth any time over that.

He was ok, but in the end I think overrated. The main reason being all the songs that Nirvana ever performed sounded exactly like every other song they performed. Cobains mumble-mouth nonsense lyrics made it impossible to differentiate between songs that were essentially the same.

I wish I could become a music supstar producing three albums with just one song and the whole time mumbling my way through it....

Everyone tried to cash in on the grunge movement including bands that moved to Seattle to take advantage. All the bands that came out of Seattle at that time had been toiling away in that particular scene for years. The media was so ridiculous, it is easy to blame Kurt for the circus-like atmosphere. Remember Marc Jacobs' haute couture flannel shirts being shown during fashion week? Ridiculous! How about the NY Times Style page being had by a Sub Pop employee over fake slang? Equally ridiculous!

All the people that don't like Kurt are reacting to the hype surrounding him. I remember when he was alive, he was being ridiculed for whining, although I don't remember him actually doing any whining at the time. He wrote about being alienated and unloved. Horray for all of you that have never felt alienated or unloved! How lucky for
you! I guess he put his money where his mouth was and killed himself. Just think how all of you would be whining if he didn't. Turns out he actually WAS miserable! Imagine that! Are you all so cynical that you didn't believe him when he sang about it? I did.

Kurt may have not been a guitar afficiando, but I think simple guitar chords make the best songs. He wrote great lyrics and while his scream may now grate on peoples' nerves, it was novel at the time. He had a REASON to scream. In comparison, the idiots in Incubus/Linkin Park/Puddle of Mudd are screaming to be like Kurt.

One more thing, and I have mentioned it on DU before. Nirvana's studio albums were too polished for me. To really hear the true Nirvana sound, you must hear the bootlegs where they are raw.

No. We just don't think he was very good at what he did.

singer/songwriter at a time when a generation was looking for a figurehead. That's about it.

I think Cobain's popularity is more a statement on the musical environment he rose in instead of a statement of his "genius".

When music gets so homogenized and mediocre the kids are hungry for ANYTHING that makes it above the bland. Think Jim Morrison and the Sex Pistols.

I think the Internet will eventually change the gatekeepers of culture cycle that this occurs in.

"Everyone tried to cash in on the grunge movement including bands that moved to Seattle to take advantage."

Including Nirvana... originally from Aberdeen... moved to Olympia, then Tacoma, then Seattle when they figured out they had a better chance of "making it" there. Hell, Dave Grohl isn't even from Washington State. Nirvana cashed in on the "Seattle scene", thanks to all of the innovators who actually gave birth to the scene here, years before.

"The media was so ridiculous, it is easy to blame Kurt for the circus-like atmosphere. "

I don't blame Kurt for that, and nobody with an ounce of intelligence would. What I do blame Kurt for is doing everything in his power to co-opt a thriving scene's style, then going out of his way to obtain a record deal with the largest corporate label in the world, all the while bemoaning how miserable it all was. He had neither the talent nor intelligence to get off the roller coaster when it got out of control.

"All the people that don't like Kurt are reacting to the hype surrounding him."

No.. speaking as someone who had a "backstage pass" to the great Seattle scene explosion, I can tell you I am reacting to his disingenuous manipulation of a gullible music-buying populace.

"He wrote about being alienated and unloved. "

So did many, many more talented people throughout rock's history. What set him apart?

"Kurt may have not been a guitar afficiando, but I think simple guitar chords make the best songs. "

Attitudes like this are why we are overburdened with glorified karaoke singers today. Thanks, Kurt, for lowering the bar.


"his scream may now grate on peoples' nerves, it was novel at the time."

Huh? Do you really believe that he was the first singer to scream?

"Nirvana's studio albums were too polished for me."

There's a good reason for that.... it's what happens when Geffen Records pays a producer a kingly salary to produce and mass-market a commercial recording.... something that Kurt not only allowed, but actively spent years attempting to achieve

my opinions don't need corrections. I am not looking for validation from someone who had a so-called "backstage pass" on the Seattle scene. Thanks anyway.

Considering that Kurt Cobain played the game, and in the process, played a bunch of easily manipulated people like you, I would say that yes, your opinions need corrections.

Dear Barfly, Oh the time it took you to make all of those corrections only for the stroking of your own ego and to spread the (unfounded/unprovable) gospel according to opie ate 69! What I find remarkable is that the Seattle scene condoned your presence. What truly separates the things you say, to the things ellie says, is that you, lone barfly, are the only one that hears you, and by your response we all can see that you love to read what you type. I would demand that you validate what you have said, but like most of the world, I could care less about your speculation. I admire fans, not critics, nor critics of fans. As a musician from the "Great Seattle Scene", give me that fuc**** pass back.!

"you, lone barfly, are the only one that hears you"

You couldn't be further from the truth. Contrary to what Rolling Stone may lead you to believe, there are millions of us who simply could give a shit about Kurt.


"I would demand that you validate what you have said, but like most of the world, I could care less about your speculation"

Speculation? I guess since I played shows with them, and actually met the man on many occasions, it may be a little more than speculation, Sparky.


"As a musician from the "Great Seattle Scene", give me that fuc**** pass back.!"

Let me guess.. you moved out to Seattle with all the other carpet-baggers, and the highlight of your "musical career" was playing at the RKCNDY on $2 beer wednesday night?

People were calling in asking me to play Nirvana in honor of Kurt. They went on and on about how he was the Bob Dylan of our generation.

I basically told them that he offed himself and it wasn't a big tragedy. I also told them that he was no Bob Dylan. I refused to play any of it.

Besides, I like Foo Fighters way better than Nirvana. If Kurt hadn't bought the farm, there wouldn't have been FOO.

Anyone who has been paying attention is aware that Grohl was the arranger and the detail guy in Nirvana. Even Novaselic (sp?) said that Cobain would come in with a rough song sketches and lyrics and that Dave turned them into a hits.

So, while Kurt was the voice, Dave was the brains. Still is in the Foo Fighters.
The Professor

unfortunately Nirvana's music, aside from bumping all the hair foo-foo bands from the top 40 (welcome in my opinion), literally swept virtually every non-Nirvana like artist from the college station playlists of 1991. I was there. I watched it happen. Suddenly bands with amazing potential and a little growing popularity were snuffed.

The Katytdids - gone
Urge Overkill - jumped to majopr label, faded immediately
Too Much Joy - squasher
Single Gun Theory - erradicated
EMF - emf-who?
The Blake Babies - gone (Juliana Hatfield's solo career was soon to follow)
Bullet Lavolta - vanished
Lush - wiped out

And, say what you want, Nirvana's records weren't all that good and DON'T stand up to repeated listening.

EMF deserved to be stomped into oblivion.

I loved Nirvana. I was 18 when "Smells Like Teen Spirit" came out. I felt like he talked to me, as the age 18 was a difficult time in my life.

Yeah, he wasnt the greatest guitar player or singer but it was his words that called out to me and others who loved him.

I cant imagine a how it feels to want to kill yourself but I understand it. People who are in that much pain dont realize what they are about to do is selfish, they just want the pain to go away.

So, I will play Nirvana to tonight, in memory of Kurt Cobain. Thanks to him, we now have Dave Grohl, who is one of the best musicians out there today.

P.S. I love the Pixies too but Black Francis is not a very good songwriter, IMHO.

Really more of a legend than a voice for his generation. He has been very influential himself.

to each his own. I would not call Nirvana corporate (nothing wrong with a little polish.) I think the whole band was talented and rounded Kurt out, but they would not have been the same without Kurt. Kurt gave out really anguished wails - not forced screaming.

Then what would you call a band who signed to the largest friggin corporate record label in the world? The same band who spent the next 3 years doing all of the requisite marketing associated with being signed to a major label?

I am happy they got a deal. Another thing I don't understand: wishing a group remained obscure.

Frankly, I don't care that they signed and got huge.. what bothers me is the fact that they actively sought out fame, became immensely famous, then conned a bunch of people into thinking that they were victims of circumstance. As far as the music not being corporate, have you ever heard any of their music before Vig/Geffen got a hold of them? Butch Vig did exactly what a top dollar producer gets paid for.... he made a bunch of unrefined, non-commercial crappy songs marketable... thanks to a huge bankroll from Geffen. If that isn't corporate, then I don't know what is. Frankly, I prefer "corporate" music in most cases, but all the yahoos who wish to elevate this second-rate musician to god-like status seem to be the ones who also constantly bemoan all things "corporate".
In any case, I think Maynard Keenan pretty well summed it up:

"All you know about me is what I've sold you, dumbfuck. I sold out long before you ever even heard my name. I sold my soul to make a record, dipshit. Then, you bought one"

and the music was not corporate in comparison to many other artists. I feel that I have explained myself enough there - it's a matter of perception. As for Cobain relishing success, he was never really ready for it. And if the record labels would have signed more talented artists later, his fame really would have worked out. Some artists thrive off of success. Cobain did not.

Worthy of unwavering praise, and Icon status? I still say no. As far as labels signing other, more talented artists, they simply have never worked that way. The industry has always moved in cycles consisting of 1 or 2 trend-setters, then myriad imitators.

Passionate playing, revealing lyrics, and strong singing make an icon in this case. Again, I guess we can agree to disagree.

And now, off to bed to dream of my impending stardom. ;)

:hi:

in which the old folks dont get it and never will or a bunch of psuedo-hip 'purists' who attack every band that isn't recording out of their parents' garage as being too corporate

i love nirvana for knocking god-awful hair metal cock rock off the charts and putting the geeks and outcasts in charge of music for a few years

I don't qualify for the purist badge, I prefer Crowded House to Nirvana. Hell, I prefer Queen to Nirvana. Maybe there's an underlying Pixies - Nirvana conflict, where we Pixies fans are pissed off at Kurt getting what was rightfully ours, I don't know, but there certainly was one band that knocked hair metal off the charts and represented the indie freaks. That band was REM.

On a purely musical level he was passable, but no Thom Yorke. As a father, he was a real piece of shit.

enjoyment counts for something and I think Kurt on Nevermind made music just as enjoyable as Thom's music.

Death cults never lead to rational discourse, on either side.

If he wasn't an influential figure in music, then how come all of us are talking about him, and this thread has gotten over 40 replies???