Nirvana C/D

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (874 of them)
It's all Lester Bangs' fault anyway, he started this crap.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 17:00 (nineteen years ago) link

You mean Bangs started grunge?
On Mudhoney: "Touch Me I'm Sick" was a good song. That's all I can say about them.

'It's not a question of right and wrong answers, it's a question of the skill of the argument.'
Why is it not that?


Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 18:35 (nineteen years ago) link

You mean Bangs started grunge?

:::sigh::::

On Mudhoney: "Touch Me I'm Sick" was a good song. That's all I can say about them.

Awfully big of ya.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Thursday, 30 September 2004 18:47 (nineteen years ago) link

x-post
No Nowell, no.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 18:48 (nineteen years ago) link

I like Mudhoney and all, but they never wrote "Moist Vagina" (which as we all know is the pinnacle of k-cob's songwriting;-).

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 30 September 2004 18:52 (nineteen years ago) link

'It's not a question of right and wrong answers, it's a question of the skill of the argument.'
Why is it not that?

Because it makes not a lick of difference to the history of popular music if some pudwapper on ILM makes a strong and interesting cases for the reassessment of the Beatles, Nirvana etc. NONE ZERO ZILCH NADA.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 18:55 (nineteen years ago) link

"Pudwapper"

Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Thursday, 30 September 2004 19:09 (nineteen years ago) link

sometimes I get bored of just saying "wanker" over and over

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 19:15 (nineteen years ago) link

'Because it makes not a lick of difference to the history of popular music if some pudwapper on ILM makes a strong and interesting cases for the reassessment of the Beatles, Nirvana etc. NONE ZERO ZILCH NADA.'

True, that.

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:27 (nineteen years ago) link

man, seeing POPPYCOCK in caps and bold made my day.

m. (mitchlnw), Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:32 (nineteen years ago) link

Cuz we just like seeing the word 'cock'!

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:33 (nineteen years ago) link

Shame on you, young lady.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:34 (nineteen years ago) link

It's just a joke...

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:37 (nineteen years ago) link

You're too young to think such things. What would Jesus say?

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:39 (nineteen years ago) link

Fuck Jesus! Just kidding.

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:40 (nineteen years ago) link

FUCK HIM IN THE ASSHOLE WITH A BIG RUBBER DICK

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:46 (nineteen years ago) link

So Aaron, you're 15 too?

n/a (Nick A.), Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:48 (nineteen years ago) link

THAT WAS A JOKE (TM).

n/a (Nick A.), Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:48 (nineteen years ago) link

x-post
(wow, did I really post that? I must have been possessed by the devil, or George Carlin)

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 20:49 (nineteen years ago) link

Because it makes not a lick of difference to the history of popular music if some pudwapper on ILM makes a strong and interesting cases for the reassessment of the Beatles, Nirvana etc. NONE ZERO ZILCH NADA.

I assume you enjoy the company of pudwappers, Aaron, else why bother coming here?

History isn't a series of established facts, it's a series of changing responses to stuff that mightn't've happened the way people want to remember it.

Also, "people just pretend to not like the same things as me cos they think it makes them cool" isn't really a strong or interesting argument about anything, is it?

noodle vague (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:27 (nineteen years ago) link

HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

If you think I'm about to have the same debate I had with Alex last night with you, you're crazy. Read that discussion again. I'm not gonna deal with this again.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:42 (nineteen years ago) link

I'm too busy wapping my pud to read it right now.

noodle vague (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:44 (nineteen years ago) link

Man you really took that to heart.
Guess I struck a nerve :-p

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:48 (nineteen years ago) link

I'm not ashamed of wapping my pud. It makes my tummy feel funny.

noodle vague (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:50 (nineteen years ago) link

Ok, I'll humor you by actually answering one of those questions:

but has it occurred to you that not everybody thinks, say, The Beatles or Nirvana are that interesting?

The Beatles and Nirvana changed ideas about popular music in their respective decades. If that at the very least is not interesting to you, what are you doing following pop music in the first place??????

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:51 (nineteen years ago) link

Pop Music (TM): "It's PudWa-stic!"

Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:54 (nineteen years ago) link

Amen to that!

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:56 (nineteen years ago) link

what are you doing following pop music in the first place??????

Listening to stuff I like.

And wapping my pud to it.

noodle vague (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:57 (nineteen years ago) link

The most interesting band in the world is Night Ranger.

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:58 (nineteen years ago) link

Are John Lennon's fans "vulture fans"? Jimi Hendrix's? Elvis'? Ian Curtis'? Jim Morrison's? Nick Drake's? This is rock n roll brother! Dead rock stars are part of the bargain!

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 21:58 (nineteen years ago) link

NOODLE VAGUE FOR THE LAST TIME IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE WHAT THE FUCK YOU OR I ACTUALLY LIKE TO LISTEN TO. THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:00 (nineteen years ago) link

yeah but the kids shoulda loved Tad instead, wakak wakka

x-post

latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:01 (nineteen years ago) link

Dead rock stars are my favorite rock stars. There's so much mystery. About what could have been...
I've never heard Tad before.

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:02 (nineteen years ago) link

I doubt I sit around listening to Nevermind and Sgt. Pepper's any more than you do, noodle vague.

Once AGAIN: I'm talking about media perceptions and subjective hipster (READ: KNEEJERK) reactions to them here.

This is not about you, but it will be if you keep pushing it...
Fuck it, give me 5 non-media/success overexposure related reasons you actually like Mudhoney better than Nirvana. I'm seriously interested in knowing why. Be sure to be strong and interesting about it.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:07 (nineteen years ago) link

Yeah, I guess I was missing the point there. Still, I think my answer would be something along the lines of the canon not being an immutable object, that it changes with time as bands are revalued, that every band's importance or influence changes as music moves in new directions, and that questioning the received opinion of a band needn't be a hipster pose but can be a sincere attempt to criticise some of the implied values attached to them.

noodle vague (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:08 (nineteen years ago) link

The Beatles and Nirvana changed ideas about popular music in their respective decades. If that at the very least is not interesting to you, what are you doing following pop music in the first place??????

Oh for cryin' out loud. NIRVANA DIDN'T "CHANGE IDEAS ABOUT POPULAR MUSIC". They merely co-opted someone else's formula and went to the bank with it. They did it well, yes, but in NO WAY IMAGINABLE was their impact comparable to the Beatles'.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:09 (nineteen years ago) link

Aaron is so smart.

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:09 (nineteen years ago) link

Alex I didn't say they did to the same extent. Here we go again...

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:10 (nineteen years ago) link

I don't like Nirvana, but I kind of like the odd zealotry Nirvana fans show in arguments about them.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:11 (nineteen years ago) link

Alex I didn't say they did to the same extent. Here we go again..

:::sigh:::

Aaron, you've got to be more careful, then, as your generalizations certainly create that impression.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:11 (nineteen years ago) link

They're just a band!

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:12 (nineteen years ago) link

They did in the sense that they made a kind of music commercially viable that wasn't before. Whether that was a good or bad thing doesn't matter. They're the ones that kicked the door open, and so were the Beatles in the 60's. Obviously the Beatles did it to a much larger extent.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:12 (nineteen years ago) link

wap wap wap

Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:13 (nineteen years ago) link

I never said I was less full of shit than anyone else on here either.

AaronHz (AaronHz), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:14 (nineteen years ago) link

I wouldn't know. Will there ever be another world-changing band? I would so love to experience something like that.

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:15 (nineteen years ago) link

The drunken point I made last night wasn't exactly that Mudhoney were better than Nirvana (I enjoy listening to Mudhoney more, though, probably because at the time I listened to Nirvana more and now I know their stuff too well) but that Kurt Cobain would give them props, in part because of his own sense of indie authenticity I guess. He certainly had an ambiguous reaction to his own increasing success.

Hey, let's just agree that we're all full of shit, eh?

noodle vague (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:15 (nineteen years ago) link

There's no reason not to argue about this...crap...

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:16 (nineteen years ago) link

They did in the sense that they made a kind of music commercially viable that wasn't before. Whether that was a good or bad thing doesn't matter. They're the ones that kicked the door open, and so were the Beatles in the 60's. Obviously the Beatles did it to a much larger extent

The Beatles were genuinely trailblazing, though, whereas Nirvana were merely staying within an already formally established style. Again, there's no real comparison here.

Alex in NYC (vassifer), Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:16 (nineteen years ago) link

xpost
....except that it gets boring.

Nowell, Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:17 (nineteen years ago) link

ha! no band worldcahnging like byzantum will be! the end of your chrsitainising ways is at hand and will make your little squabbles aout pansy rock and roll/rythm and blue feces shit music irrelevant.

the nightspirit will come, bringing cold, black northern darkness to the lands

Vas Djifrens, Thursday, 30 September 2004 22:19 (nineteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.