The Replacements: Classic or Dud?

I think that their slacker attitude (as opposed to Pavement's) does not translate well outside the US. (For the reverse thread - I would suggest Robyn Hitchcock and the Egyptians: "The Man With the Lightbulb Head" reminds me of British comedies on PBS. They're funny, though I never feel like I'm laughing for the right reasons.) A 'beery self-mythology' would leave songs like "Androgynous" and "Little Mascara" unexplained.

I think that Paul Westerberg may have sounded 'bleaurghiriffic' (great word!!) intentionally, but I find this endearing, like the nasality of Jonathan Richman's voice.

I'll quote part of Dan Perry's answer to the tunes thread: "Certain tunes fit certain ways of singing. Certain ways of singing fit certain tunes. [...] Is it suited to the lyrics being sung? Is it suited to the voice singing it? Does the person have the vocal training to pull it off? Does the person have too much vocal training to pull it off?"

I think Paul Westerberg's way of singing fit his songs. On the other hand, listeners may have different tolerances for vocal imperfections based upon their own training.

I think the claim that the Replacements' 'conflicted conflictedness' makes their songs illegitimate is not the same as saying ska-punk is bad because it rips off other musical genres. Experience may be genuinely secondhand. I think it's a suburban thing.

So I would say CLASSIC, but not for reasons of technical virtuosity or being really innovative or anything like that.

I hope I haven't destroyed the fun of this thread.

Dan, if I knew where you were, I'd buy you a beer too cause you definitely need to lighten up a little.

etc., etc., etc.

That's one of few punk albums I like. It's just so dang good.

"Mature" Replacements just don't ring my bell. They're just songs, y'know? Not bad, not especially good. Just songs, and who needs more of those.

Isn't that it, though? This long discussion has mostly just varied by personal taste and that common problem of 'young man rock passion,' where dumbass young man can't see over his ego (to his mind, quite a large vein! --lmfao) to see that his view is not the only one in the world.

Good call! Now that you mention it it does seem reminiscent of "Don't tell a Soul" era Replacements, when they were patiently plugging away at MTV in the hopes of getting REM big.

Jimmy Fallon (wearing glasses): Cool, Tina.

Tina: That's right, it's... Jimmy! You don't wear glasses!

Jimmy: I-I don't?

Tina: No! What's going to happen next!

(Winonna Ryder runs out)

Winonna Ryder (VERY HOT): One of you is the father of my child!

(shocked looks as they all freeze for the camera. Winonna Ryder cracks up. Scene falls apart)

Oh, and I grew up in and around the Twin Cities, too, so I figure my line of bullshit is just as qualified as anyone else ranting around here.

Virtually from the time they signed to Twin/Tone, the Replacements were hated by many other local musicians, probably from jealousy as much as anything else. Which is the way it's always been up there (or anywhere else on earth, I imagine) and why it's such a pathetic "scene." The same thing happens to every band that sells any records or gains a scintilla of popularity: they get ragged on. The hissing and backbiting for Trip Shakespeare, the Geardaddies, the Jayhawks, even Prince...if a band could fill the main room a couple of nights at the First Avenue, they definitely were too popular for the Twin Town cognoscenti. Time and time again I endured bitching by worthless other bands about how Westerberg sold out, couldn't write good songs, couldn't play for shit, and the worst offense--that he quit drinking and lost his talent with his habit--whenever crawling the racks at the various record stores and clubs around town. Sick.

The Replacements had some great, great moments in their released work, though live they were generally spotty. Westerberg's songs were not groundbreaking or sonically challenging but to refer to The Replacements as representative of the "worst" that the Twin Cities has or had to offer is just plain bullshit. It smacks of the immature jealousy that ruins any potential music scene. And it's all based on the fact that more people bought 'Mats' albums than Walt Mink's. And while I didn't get into all the other bands proffered up by Perry as better than the Replacements, I saw more than a few bad nights by a few of them to know that they were far from perfect. Or more relevant in any way.

The Replacements are a classic.

I'm not at all jealous of The Replacements. I just don't like them. Surely that isn't very difficult to comprehend?

At least, not any more than you are.

It's not that you just "don't like them." It's that you posit that they were the *worst* of what the Twin Cities had to offer. I mean really, you can't think of dozens of other bands who were worse? Or, as I posit, do you just think they represented the nadir of the scene because a) so many people knew who they were and b) so many more people bought their records?

There were and are plenty of reasonable people who think that the Replacements were a dumbed down version of Thin Lizzy or a lazy version of Bad Company. There are also plenty of reasonable people who think that the Replacements had some damn great songs. But you're part of the group who is intent on spinning their success (?) into something much more negative than that, something that the local music scene never needed. If anything, the attention the Replacements brought on to the indie scene in Minneapolis gave a lot of bands deals that they likely never otherwise would have had. The cancer on any scene is resentment, and whether you will deny you had any towards the Replacements, a lot of bands did.

RIP Paul Wellstone.

I freely admit that my stance on The Replacements as put forward in this thread is blatant hyperbole. I'm certain that there are many TC bands I want nothing to do with who are *objectively* (if you can measure that) worse than The Replacements. My issue with The Replacements is that they don't hit any of my emotions or any of my "ooh, that's neat!" buttons. The bands I listed do. I think _Miss Happiness_ is one of the most underrated albums of the 90s, Husker Du were phenomenal, and most of the other groups I listed outside of the Prince Axis are dance/industrial groups whose core audience probably wouldn't have had anything to do with The Replacements, anyway. I mean, the entire focus of Savage Aural Hotbed was performance art featuring kodo drumming, PVC tubing, guitar squalls, woodwind abuse and tricks with rhythm; if that's the type of thing you're looking for in your music, you're going to find The Replacements wildly uninteresting. (Likewise, the first Walt Mink song I heard was "Croton-Harmon", with its super-syncopation and absolutely killer 4/4:7/8 hook between verses; once I heard that, I was ready to dive into the rest of the album full steam.)

So, you can look at my stance from a particular viewpoint and say, "Well, he hates them because he's jealous of their success," but that's woefully inaccurate. It's much closer to "He hates them because he's not at all disposed towards the style of music they embody, but people latched onto it and he had to hear them everywhere he went because of his older brother."

(kidding)

For the record, I think and thought that the Huskers were overrated, and that Bob Mould's ego kept them from being a better band. And, while the Huskers were overrated, I loved them just the same. And since we're playing full disclosure, I will readily admit that the legacy of the Replacements is just as overrated as their live shows were. That hasn't kept them from being one of my favorite all time bands, either. If I had to measure artistic credibility or musical ambition on everything I loved, my record collection would be pretty tiny.

And that's sort of my point, actually. Within every music scene there is snobbery, and more than often than not, this snobbery is directed at bands who encounter success or at the very least, notoriety. On a larger scale--say nationally or worldly, for example--it's not all that destructive to detest the success of, say, Creed and blame it all on the mooks or other knuckle draggers. But on a local level it's quite destructive, especially when virtually any local success that translates beyond the immediate realm brings more attention to acts that normally would never see an audience. Maybe Nirvana was too rockist or too commerical for your taste, but they introduced a lot of kids to the Wipers, the Raincoats, and even Sonic Youth. The Replacements had the same effect on me; without them, I never would have ever bothered with many of the other local bands of the day, whether it was the Suburbs or the Hang Ups or 24/7 Various or any of the other wannabes who never made it. It's hard to imagine AmRep ever having a life at all without the attention the Huskers and Replacements brought to Minneapolis in the mid 80s.

That's why, to read your post, even though I knew it was hyperbole, disturbed me so. It reminded me of when I was younger and living up there and participating in a scene that so clearly measured quality by a lack of quantity in records sold. I'm sure *you* were objectively not interested in whatever the Replacements were doing in those days, but so many others who hated the Replacements did so out of jealousy and little reason else. At least you aren't interested in that style of music. Every other hata I knew based most of their anger on the fact that the Replacements got great ink wherever they went.

I guess the short version is that you, who aren't predisposed to even like music like the Replacements, couched your argument two separate times in the context of how the band represented the Twin Cities. That kinda hurt, and jackasses like me are predisposed to fly off the handle.

BTW, the Suburbs were a great band.

Classic, so ya know. (though Dan's got me doubting some songs on Tim if not Let It Be, which IS perfect - the best rock album evah, goddamnit).

I usually never tell people I like em - statements like "If you never liked the 'Mats (GOD I hate that name) you never liked rock'n'roll" piss me off too - but I adore the seemingly (genuinely?) tossed-off feel of those records, their goofy, un-self-conscious humanity. Let It Be is like a classic Howard Hawks film, or an old issue of Spiderman, or a great Fitzgerald short story: both shallow and strangely deep, timelessly rewarding in a very mysterious way, and very American.

The Black Diamond cover is HI-larious and great IMO. But Let It Be is simply my fave album ever, so I'm kinda biased.

-- Anthony Miccio (anthonymicci...), June 15th, 2003.

You are quite obviously a man with marvelous taste. I only prefer The Clash's s/t and Funhouse to the glorious Let It Be.

Clash and Fun House both make my top ten, Francis, but I think the Mat's side 2 is stronger than the Stooges, and some of Mick Jones's songs on the Clash keep them from upstaging the Mats.

In the movie, two Replacements songs are used by the prom band..

I had this to ask on the ILE thread (no answer yet..)

I was wondering if Michael Stipe used that [Replacements song] because for 20 years he may have been saying that the Replacements were the ultimate teen movie prom band. .. Or was it just that they were looking for some music and decided that "Inherit the Earth" was a good song to use. I'm choosing the former because they used "Skyway" also.

Is this the first ILM hive mind accusation? (Not that I haven't made similar comments from time to time.)

Yeah, I read it recently and it was great. It would have been really easy for the book to come across like a laundry list of fuck-ups, but it manages to avoid that.

Out of interest, does the book specifically talk about their major 1987 London show I attended where Paul was so fucked up he couldn't even stand, let alone sing or play? Or was that just par for the course at that time and not worth its own mention?

No, nothing specific about that show. There were more details about the prior euro tour because it was their first time overseas. The 87 shows were noted as being more of the same with rowdy London shows but low turnout outside of that.

Hootenany is my favorite but it might suffer from the bias of being the first Replacements record I bought

I have it as high as 3rd on some days. YMMV, but the thrash rockers add to the overall album for me, rather than, I dunno Red Red Wine or whatever.

November 15, 1987 @ Orpheum, Minneapolis. "Notes: during ‘Never Mind’ Paul falls off the stage. You can hear a thump in the recording. ‘Dude Looks Like A Lady’ (Aerosmith) is inserted during ‘Gary’s Got A Boner.’

I know it's been discussed here and elsewhere, but the reported relative lack of traction the Replacements had/have outside of America ... that's totally linked to the fact that the band's fucked up-ed-ness is fundamentally, even foundationally American, right? I can't think of a better metaphor for this country than a self-destructive, simultaneously effortlessly brilliant and accidentally brilliant band as apt to rip your heart out as fall off the stage, or offer galvanizing, generation-defining anthems alongside nods to late-era Aerosmith in the middle of a song about boners.

I think it's that particular mix of decadence and unpretentiousness, though even by that standard there's not really anyone else like them in America, either.

we're comin to your town
we're gonna fall right down
we're an American band