"My Chemical Romance is this generation's Nirvana"

Anyway, I'm calling MCR = this generation's CCR.

people have niches, that's fine, but niches age too. if MCR falls in your particular row to hoe and you ignore them in favour of similar bands from 10 years ago, that's your prerogative, but you will likely find that the audience for your writing will rise in average age, as well as steadily decrease in size.

And I actually agree with some of what Ultragrrl is saying.

no, the problem with all this is not not the writing of how to not be able to not enjoy some dumbass group that does not cut the mustard just like the rest of 'em, not.

And oh how my heart is bent.

Keep in mind that Ultragrrrl likes to think that she 'discovered' MCR (although they were widely known in NY/NJ long before she knew who they were, and on their way to a major-label contract), and it's pretty obvious to me that she sees herself as this generation's Malcolm McLaren or something. She probably thinks the Misshapes parties are the 00's version of Max's Kansas City or CBGB.

Completely true and OTM, but then someone says something like this --

some dumbass group that does not cut the mustard just like the rest of 'em, not

-- which doesn't fly for me. The issue isn't this group in particular; it's a lot of groups like this, and the fact that they're actual formative favorite-band material for lots of kids. It's a whole musical worldview and grounding that a sizeable number of people are going to have. Casting any one band as not-cutting-mustard is fair enough and often accurate, but insufficient to really understand the gaps between those different musical worldviews.

"MY CHEMICAL ROMANCE
Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge
(Warner Bros.)

Now that after-school programs and arts funding are being excised from our public schools thanks to the Bush tax cut and the states' subsequent budget rejiggering, music has become the latchkey baby-sitter, educator, and supporter of our world-weary teens. Guess what, Mom and Pop, you'd best be keeping tabs on your children's favorite bands, since they'll likely have as big an effect on the kids' worldview as you will. And if your kids have any sort of taste, New Jersey newcomers My Chemical Romance's "I'm Not Okay (I Promise)" rocks their Discmans regularly. The MTV-ready single—featuring a playful, Rushmore-lite video—puts some pump in the slump of many a tragi-lescent with its peppy, let's-group-hug-the-pain-away chorus and all-inclusive sentimentality. The rest of the quintet's major-label debut similarly sandblasts dimples on middle-class ennui thanks to Gerard Way's hyperactive, hiccupping vocals and guitarist Ray Toto's unabashed love for both the Fugazi and Guns N' Roses catalogs. Considering the smart, sensitive, and melodic pleas of "Helena," "Cemetery Drive," and "It's Not a Fashion Statement, It's a Death Wish," we could do worse than a generation hooked on emo. Sure, it sucks that there ain't much adult supervision or book learnin' going on, but why educate when the only goal of our education system is to raise more burger flippers, right? YANCEY STR1CKLER"

You really need excuses and pseudogrievances like these to justify the fact that one of the most affluent groups of people in history (middle-class Americans) are incredibly self-indulgent. What problems do emo and MCR fans have that need to be "hugged away"?

It's hard to symptathize with bands and audiences who whine and cry a lot unless you give them all sorts of big problems for which they are trying to cope with (real or not). They just look like brats without the grievances and so you can't make their crosses fast enough.

if MCR are her Sex Pistols, what will be her Bow Wow Wow? or duck rock, for that matter.

MCR looks like such a caricature of a "Hot Topic band" that I can't see them expanding their audience too much outside of that audience and the Arctic Monkeys seem a little too tied to British culture to have the kind of success Franz Ferdind had in America. We'll see though.

i could do a LOT better than a generation hooked on (m)emo.

OTM

A more important discussion is: why are the top three threads on ILM right now about a plagiarizing PFork 'journalist', whether SPIN is still relevant, and whether a band calling themselves 'My Chemical Romance' has any significant impact on music?
We've got bigger problems than this thread, people.

He's mentioned it before.

no way! Manson gives great interviews at least

I'll bet you any sum of money you like the bands that have success in MCR's wake, if any do, will be a hell of a lot more enjoyable than those that did in Nirvana's wake, too.

I put Nirvana in the '90s on footing with Elvis of the '50s, The Beatles of the '60s and the Sex Pistols in the '70s in that their influence was felt beyond record collections, beyond simply influencing other bands. Call it the "Life Magazine" factor. (Or the "People Magazine" factor, if you prefer.)

Call it a "before/after" effect: Nirvana is one of a handful of bands whom you can point to their emergence and draw a line that everything was different after their arrival.

Has My Chemical Romance helped spur the worlds of fashion, the media, other forms of artistic expression? I don't think it's debatable.

If Ultragrrl is equating how the lyrics of MCR are just as poignant to this generation as Cobain's was to his, that is a little less cut and dried and frankly, kind of silly to debate. I would at least concede this point because I don't begrudge any generation for grasping onto music. (My biggest fear is be a generation that doesn't.)

So yeah, if she means their lyrics are as inspiring to a new generation of kids, fine. I'll have to mention a dozen other groups that can probably claim at least as much of an impact in this regard, however, whereas Nirvana seemed head and shoulders among their peers at the time and even in retrospect, but otherwise, I could care less.

But equating MCR's impact on pop culture as a whole to Nirvana is kind of silly.

I read a SPIN article a few years back where they said that 2004 was going to be the year they tried to market mallpunk as the new grunge (meaning the genre that would get kids excited about "real" rock music again) with MCR as the new Nirvana (meaning the band launched the genre into the mainstream), and "I'm Not Okay" being the "Teen Spirit" of 2004 (meaning that both songs and videos explored similar themes and targeted the same demographics). However, Ultragrrrl or any other critic could have been said about Green Day's "Longview" in 1994, Korn's "Got The Life" in 1998, or The Strokes' "Last Night" in 2001.

It's gotten to the point where there are too many alt-rock subgenres played on modern rock stations for there to be another Nirvana. What made Nirvana special was that they sparked the concept of the modern rock format, and anyone who says that MCR wouldn't have blown up without Nirvana is 100% correct. There is no "modern day Nirvana" right now. If you want to believe that MRC is the closest thing to it, go right ahead, but their impact is nowhere near what Nirvana achieved.

Also I still hate every Nirvana thread ever. It's when ILM sounds the most ignorant to me.

Brian, I still don't buy this for a second. And never have. Haircuts changed, I guess.