News:

Incontinence Hotline ... Can you hold, please?

Main Menu

Review: The Aristocrats

Started by Beef, August 14, 2005, 08:36:16 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ReBurn

Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:27:13 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:24:18 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:07:24 AM
Nirvana sucked almost as bad as CAKE.  That's just my opinion.  At least they had MTV.

Pffft.

Of course, all taste in music is subjective. I'm not speaking as to the quality of their music necessarily, but their impact on the music scene of the time.

I remember the first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit (yes, I know they had plenty of music before that, but I didn't know of them until that song, much like the majority of people). I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. It was completely different than anything I'd ever seen.
Well put. I tend to think that Pearl Jam had more impact, but they (as a band) hated the press. They tend to get forgotten. And I agree about the impact, the record industry was in about the same shape then as it's in now.

Musically (to me) is a fairly specific set of issues, lyric content is another matter. I feel totally unable to judge lyrics, I haven't paid attention to them (except for Ben Folds) since Earth, Wind and Fire released "Faces"...
Same here about judging lyrics. After all of those years of piano lessons with that tyrannical old woman I tend to totally disregard the lyrics of a song and concentrate on the music itself. In that respect Nirvana was absolutely no different from any of the other Seattle grunge bands.

That's why I don't listen to tons of new music. None of it is really all that original any more. It's all about the formula for selling records. The best music comes from the indie artists that you never hear from, which I find sad.
I listen to jazz (read be-bop, not that "smooth" stuff) and mostly avoid the whole thing...
I think that it takes a true artisan to really "get" jazz.  To be able to put a finger on that "thing" that is going on behind the music is really difficult for me.  To be able to play it really takes a true artisan.
11:42:24 [Gamplayerx] I keep getting knocked up.
11:42:28 [Gamplayerx] Er. OUT!

ursus

Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:30:34 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:27:13 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:24:18 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:07:24 AM
Nirvana sucked almost as bad as CAKE.  That's just my opinion.  At least they had MTV.

Pffft.

Of course, all taste in music is subjective. I'm not speaking as to the quality of their music necessarily, but their impact on the music scene of the time.

I remember the first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit (yes, I know they had plenty of music before that, but I didn't know of them until that song, much like the majority of people). I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. It was completely different than anything I'd ever seen.
Well put. I tend to think that Pearl Jam had more impact, but they (as a band) hated the press. They tend to get forgotten. And I agree about the impact, the record industry was in about the same shape then as it's in now.

Musically (to me) is a fairly specific set of issues, lyric content is another matter. I feel totally unable to judge lyrics, I haven't paid attention to them (except for Ben Folds) since Earth, Wind and Fire released "Faces"...
Same here about judging lyrics. After all of those years of piano lessons with that tyrannical old woman I tend to totally disregard the lyrics of a song and concentrate on the music itself. In that respect Nirvana was absolutely no different from any of the other Seattle grunge bands.

That's why I don't listen to tons of new music. None of it is really all that original any more. It's all about the formula for selling records. The best music comes from the indie artists that you never hear from, which I find sad.
I listen to jazz (read be-bop, not that "smooth" stuff) and mostly avoid the whole thing...
I think that it takes a true artisan to really "get" jazz.  To be able to put a finger on that "thing" that is going on behind the music is really difficult for me.  To be able to play it really takes a true artisan.
Bunches of people feel that way. And some of it is hard to listen to 'cuz they player(s) want to be snotty. But when they use it in commercials on network TV lots of people snap their fingers and smile with all of us snobs. My favorite form of music has some image/perception problems...
I was just wondering...

Jessie

Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:30:34 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:27:13 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:24:18 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:07:24 AM
Nirvana sucked almost as bad as CAKE.  That's just my opinion.  At least they had MTV.

Pffft.

Of course, all taste in music is subjective. I'm not speaking as to the quality of their music necessarily, but their impact on the music scene of the time.

I remember the first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit (yes, I know they had plenty of music before that, but I didn't know of them until that song, much like the majority of people). I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. It was completely different than anything I'd ever seen.
Well put. I tend to think that Pearl Jam had more impact, but they (as a band) hated the press. They tend to get forgotten. And I agree about the impact, the record industry was in about the same shape then as it's in now.

Musically (to me) is a fairly specific set of issues, lyric content is another matter. I feel totally unable to judge lyrics, I haven't paid attention to them (except for Ben Folds) since Earth, Wind and Fire released "Faces"...
Same here about judging lyrics. After all of those years of piano lessons with that tyrannical old woman I tend to totally disregard the lyrics of a song and concentrate on the music itself. In that respect Nirvana was absolutely no different from any of the other Seattle grunge bands.

That's why I don't listen to tons of new music. None of it is really all that original any more. It's all about the formula for selling records. The best music comes from the indie artists that you never hear from, which I find sad.
I listen to jazz (read be-bop, not that "smooth" stuff) and mostly avoid the whole thing...
I think that it takes a true artisan to really "get" jazz.  To be able to put a finger on that "thing" that is going on behind the music is really difficult for me.  To be able to play it really takes a true artisan.

I feel that way about Bluegrass.  Seriously.

I've yet to see another genre of music that exceeds the difficulty level of playing Bluegrass.  There may be some equal, but I don't know of any that require more talent.
we should have kept the quote pyramid up to rape Jessie in the face.

ursus

Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:37:56 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:30:34 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:27:13 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:24:18 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:07:24 AM
Nirvana sucked almost as bad as CAKE.  That's just my opinion.  At least they had MTV.

Pffft.

Of course, all taste in music is subjective. I'm not speaking as to the quality of their music necessarily, but their impact on the music scene of the time.

I remember the first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit (yes, I know they had plenty of music before that, but I didn't know of them until that song, much like the majority of people). I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. It was completely different than anything I'd ever seen.
Well put. I tend to think that Pearl Jam had more impact, but they (as a band) hated the press. They tend to get forgotten. And I agree about the impact, the record industry was in about the same shape then as it's in now.

Musically (to me) is a fairly specific set of issues, lyric content is another matter. I feel totally unable to judge lyrics, I haven't paid attention to them (except for Ben Folds) since Earth, Wind and Fire released "Faces"...
Same here about judging lyrics. After all of those years of piano lessons with that tyrannical old woman I tend to totally disregard the lyrics of a song and concentrate on the music itself. In that respect Nirvana was absolutely no different from any of the other Seattle grunge bands.

That's why I don't listen to tons of new music. None of it is really all that original any more. It's all about the formula for selling records. The best music comes from the indie artists that you never hear from, which I find sad.
I listen to jazz (read be-bop, not that "smooth" stuff) and mostly avoid the whole thing...
I think that it takes a true artisan to really "get" jazz.  To be able to put a finger on that "thing" that is going on behind the music is really difficult for me.  To be able to play it really takes a true artisan.

I feel that way about Bluegrass.  Seriously.

I've yet to see another genre of music that exceeds the difficulty level of playing Bluegrass.  There may be some equal, but I don't know of any that require more talent.
Depends on the instrument. BG bass tends toward simple, jazz is tougher. Mandolin is tough because its so small, the parts are generally fialy easy. Five string banjo, any trombone and any piano are tough, tough, tough.
And for the record, I dig Flatt & Scruggs...
I was just wondering...

Jessie

Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:45:06 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:37:56 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:30:34 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:27:13 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:24:18 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:07:24 AM
Nirvana sucked almost as bad as CAKE.  That's just my opinion.  At least they had MTV.

Pffft.

Of course, all taste in music is subjective. I'm not speaking as to the quality of their music necessarily, but their impact on the music scene of the time.

I remember the first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit (yes, I know they had plenty of music before that, but I didn't know of them until that song, much like the majority of people). I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. It was completely different than anything I'd ever seen.
Well put. I tend to think that Pearl Jam had more impact, but they (as a band) hated the press. They tend to get forgotten. And I agree about the impact, the record industry was in about the same shape then as it's in now.

Musically (to me) is a fairly specific set of issues, lyric content is another matter. I feel totally unable to judge lyrics, I haven't paid attention to them (except for Ben Folds) since Earth, Wind and Fire released "Faces"...
Same here about judging lyrics. After all of those years of piano lessons with that tyrannical old woman I tend to totally disregard the lyrics of a song and concentrate on the music itself. In that respect Nirvana was absolutely no different from any of the other Seattle grunge bands.

That's why I don't listen to tons of new music. None of it is really all that original any more. It's all about the formula for selling records. The best music comes from the indie artists that you never hear from, which I find sad.
I listen to jazz (read be-bop, not that "smooth" stuff) and mostly avoid the whole thing...
I think that it takes a true artisan to really "get" jazz.  To be able to put a finger on that "thing" that is going on behind the music is really difficult for me.  To be able to play it really takes a true artisan.

I feel that way about Bluegrass.  Seriously.

I've yet to see another genre of music that exceeds the difficulty level of playing Bluegrass.  There may be some equal, but I don't know of any that require more talent.
Depends on the instrument. BG bass tends toward simple, jazz is tougher. Mandolin is tough because its so small, the parts are generally fialy easy. Five string banjo, any trombone and any piano are tough, tough, tough.
And for the record, I dig Flatt & Scruggs...
Mandolin, banjo and bluegrass guitar are amazingly difficult.  The speed that those guys (and girls) play...wow.  If you've never seen a good bluegrass band live, GO.  I guarantee that you'll leave awestruck.
we should have kept the quote pyramid up to rape Jessie in the face.

ReBurn

Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:49:27 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:45:06 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:37:56 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:30:34 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:27:13 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:24:18 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:07:24 AM
Nirvana sucked almost as bad as CAKE.  That's just my opinion.  At least they had MTV.

Pffft.

Of course, all taste in music is subjective. I'm not speaking as to the quality of their music necessarily, but their impact on the music scene of the time.

I remember the first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit (yes, I know they had plenty of music before that, but I didn't know of them until that song, much like the majority of people). I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. It was completely different than anything I'd ever seen.
Well put. I tend to think that Pearl Jam had more impact, but they (as a band) hated the press. They tend to get forgotten. And I agree about the impact, the record industry was in about the same shape then as it's in now.

Musically (to me) is a fairly specific set of issues, lyric content is another matter. I feel totally unable to judge lyrics, I haven't paid attention to them (except for Ben Folds) since Earth, Wind and Fire released "Faces"...
Same here about judging lyrics. After all of those years of piano lessons with that tyrannical old woman I tend to totally disregard the lyrics of a song and concentrate on the music itself. In that respect Nirvana was absolutely no different from any of the other Seattle grunge bands.

That's why I don't listen to tons of new music. None of it is really all that original any more. It's all about the formula for selling records. The best music comes from the indie artists that you never hear from, which I find sad.
I listen to jazz (read be-bop, not that "smooth" stuff) and mostly avoid the whole thing...
I think that it takes a true artisan to really "get" jazz.  To be able to put a finger on that "thing" that is going on behind the music is really difficult for me.  To be able to play it really takes a true artisan.

I feel that way about Bluegrass.  Seriously.

I've yet to see another genre of music that exceeds the difficulty level of playing Bluegrass.  There may be some equal, but I don't know of any that require more talent.
Depends on the instrument. BG bass tends toward simple, jazz is tougher. Mandolin is tough because its so small, the parts are generally fialy easy. Five string banjo, any trombone and any piano are tough, tough, tough.
And for the record, I dig Flatt & Scruggs...
Mandolin, banjo and bluegrass guitar are amazingly difficult.  The speed that those guys (and girls) play...wow.  If you've never seen a good bluegrass band live, GO.  I guarantee that you'll leave awestruck.
If not somewhat twangy
11:42:24 [Gamplayerx] I keep getting knocked up.
11:42:28 [Gamplayerx] Er. OUT!

BigDun

Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:51:21 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:49:27 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:45:06 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:37:56 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:30:34 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:27:13 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:24:18 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:07:24 AM
Nirvana sucked almost as bad as CAKE.  That's just my opinion.  At least they had MTV.

Pffft.

Of course, all taste in music is subjective. I'm not speaking as to the quality of their music necessarily, but their impact on the music scene of the time.

I remember the first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit (yes, I know they had plenty of music before that, but I didn't know of them until that song, much like the majority of people). I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. It was completely different than anything I'd ever seen.
Well put. I tend to think that Pearl Jam had more impact, but they (as a band) hated the press. They tend to get forgotten. And I agree about the impact, the record industry was in about the same shape then as it's in now.

Musically (to me) is a fairly specific set of issues, lyric content is another matter. I feel totally unable to judge lyrics, I haven't paid attention to them (except for Ben Folds) since Earth, Wind and Fire released "Faces"...
Same here about judging lyrics. After all of those years of piano lessons with that tyrannical old woman I tend to totally disregard the lyrics of a song and concentrate on the music itself. In that respect Nirvana was absolutely no different from any of the other Seattle grunge bands.

That's why I don't listen to tons of new music. None of it is really all that original any more. It's all about the formula for selling records. The best music comes from the indie artists that you never hear from, which I find sad.
I listen to jazz (read be-bop, not that "smooth" stuff) and mostly avoid the whole thing...
I think that it takes a true artisan to really "get" jazz.  To be able to put a finger on that "thing" that is going on behind the music is really difficult for me.  To be able to play it really takes a true artisan.

I feel that way about Bluegrass.  Seriously.

I've yet to see another genre of music that exceeds the difficulty level of playing Bluegrass.  There may be some equal, but I don't know of any that require more talent.
Depends on the instrument. BG bass tends toward simple, jazz is tougher. Mandolin is tough because its so small, the parts are generally fialy easy. Five string banjo, any trombone and any piano are tough, tough, tough.
And for the record, I dig Flatt & Scruggs...
Mandolin, banjo and bluegrass guitar are amazingly difficult.  The speed that those guys (and girls) play...wow.  If you've never seen a good bluegrass band live, GO.  I guarantee that you'll leave awestruck.
If not somewhat twangy
Kind of like licking a 9volt battery.
16:26:25 [DownSouth] I'm in a monkey rutt

ursus

Quote from: BigDun on August 15, 2005, 08:52:17 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:51:21 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:49:27 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:45:06 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:37:56 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:30:34 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:27:13 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:24:18 AM
Quote from: ursus on August 15, 2005, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Jessie on August 15, 2005, 08:11:40 AM
Quote from: ReBurninator on August 15, 2005, 08:07:24 AM
Nirvana sucked almost as bad as CAKE.  That's just my opinion.  At least they had MTV.

Pffft.

Of course, all taste in music is subjective. I'm not speaking as to the quality of their music necessarily, but their impact on the music scene of the time.

I remember the first time I saw the video for Smells Like Teen Spirit (yes, I know they had plenty of music before that, but I didn't know of them until that song, much like the majority of people). I couldn't take my eyes off the screen. It was completely different than anything I'd ever seen.
Well put. I tend to think that Pearl Jam had more impact, but they (as a band) hated the press. They tend to get forgotten. And I agree about the impact, the record industry was in about the same shape then as it's in now.

Musically (to me) is a fairly specific set of issues, lyric content is another matter. I feel totally unable to judge lyrics, I haven't paid attention to them (except for Ben Folds) since Earth, Wind and Fire released "Faces"...
Same here about judging lyrics. After all of those years of piano lessons with that tyrannical old woman I tend to totally disregard the lyrics of a song and concentrate on the music itself. In that respect Nirvana was absolutely no different from any of the other Seattle grunge bands.

That's why I don't listen to tons of new music. None of it is really all that original any more. It's all about the formula for selling records. The best music comes from the indie artists that you never hear from, which I find sad.
I listen to jazz (read be-bop, not that "smooth" stuff) and mostly avoid the whole thing...
I think that it takes a true artisan to really "get" jazz.  To be able to put a finger on that "thing" that is going on behind the music is really difficult for me.  To be able to play it really takes a true artisan.

I feel that way about Bluegrass.  Seriously.

I've yet to see another genre of music that exceeds the difficulty level of playing Bluegrass.  There may be some equal, but I don't know of any that require more talent.
Depends on the instrument. BG bass tends toward simple, jazz is tougher. Mandolin is tough because its so small, the parts are generally fialy easy. Five string banjo, any trombone and any piano are tough, tough, tough.
And for the record, I dig Flatt & Scruggs...
Mandolin, banjo and bluegrass guitar are amazingly difficult.  The speed that those guys (and girls) play...wow.  If you've never seen a good bluegrass band live, GO.  I guarantee that you'll leave awestruck.
If not somewhat twangy
Kind of like licking a 9volt battery.
I'd love to go, I just don't know where to go after the show to get possum... :evil:
I was just wondering...

ursus

I was just wondering...

ReBurn

11:42:24 [Gamplayerx] I keep getting knocked up.
11:42:28 [Gamplayerx] Er. OUT!

ursus

...or squirrel...



ohhh shit, sorry DC...
I was just wondering...

Jessie

Squirrel is actually kinda good.
we should have kept the quote pyramid up to rape Jessie in the face.

ReBurn

11:42:24 [Gamplayerx] I keep getting knocked up.
11:42:28 [Gamplayerx] Er. OUT!

eo000

oh, and there were tons of bea arthur has a cock, and andy dick has a vagina jokes. those were pretty funny.

Beefy


cnamon

That is not a good picture of her.  But she is very pretty.

Jessie

I wouldn't fuck Bea Arthur's dick with Andy Dick's vagina.

I liked that one.
we should have kept the quote pyramid up to rape Jessie in the face.

dazie

I had such a good idea last night.  I was going to put Beefy's head on Jack Black's body in the attached pic.  It would have been funny.

Alas- I have no Photoshop thanks to my incompetent computer guy.

So just imagine it in your head.  It's funny.

[attachment deleted by admin]
"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
I think so, Brain, but how will we get the Spice Girls into the paella?

Beefy

On the topic of Kurt Cobain:

People think KC's importance comes from his body of work as a musician.  This has some merit, but is arguable.  His music was certainly responsible for ushering in a new wave of rawer, more genuinely emotional rock and roll after more than a decade of pop plasticity.  A lot of the more sludgy aspects of Nirvana's music was clearly in direct response to all that shallowness.

Where his real value was, which most people missed, was that he was a spokesperson for an entire generation who until that moment didn't feel like it had a voice.  It was angry and uninterested and angsty and there was no room in popular society for it until Nirvana can screaming in with a sharp sound and wailingly honest emotion.  The tragedy of his death was that it was indicative of how a very large portion of modern youth at the time felt, but the older generation completely missed that.  His biggest importance was as a representative of a larger collective.  Something Kurt knew he had become, even though he did not like the mantle (of course he didn't).

When Kurt wasn't miserable he was capable of some really excellent songwriting.  When he was happy he managed some truly amazing musical moments.  Nirvana's Unplugged performance is a good example of this.  Despite it being for MTV, it gave Kurt an opportunity for his songwriting to really come forward, as well as a chance to share and promote some of his influences.

I've often wondered what the real follow up to Nevermind sounded like.  The one Kurt scrapped when the label scolded him for making too 'down' of a record, so he made one even worse.

I saw Nirvana play the Roseland in NYC on their last tour.  The show was very much like Cobain's personality - loud, raw, unhappy, and honest.  It was both tragic to watch and yet wonderful.  That was the last show I ever "moshed" at.

I don't think you have to like Cobain's music to see the significance he had in our pop culture.

Listener

Quote from: Beefy on August 14, 2005, 08:36:16 PM

Is Bob Saget is the greatest person on the face of the planet?  Looks possible.


I have seen Bob Saget do stand-up, and I have two words:  Fucking.  Awesome.

Imagine the speed with which Eddie Izzard does comedy.  Now make him about 50,000 times dirtier, American, and not a cross-dresser.  And taller.  That about covers it.

eo000

Quote from: Listener on August 15, 2005, 07:57:44 PM
Quote from: Beefy on August 14, 2005, 08:36:16 PM

Is Bob Saget is the greatest person on the face of the planet?  Looks possible.


I have seen Bob Saget do stand-up, and I have two words:  Fucking.  Awesome.

Imagine the speed with which Eddie Izzard does comedy.  Now make him about 50,000 times dirtier, American, and not a cross-dresser.  And taller.  That about covers it.
with or without heels?

Infobahn

Quote from: eo000 on August 15, 2005, 08:58:38 PM
Quote from: Listener on August 15, 2005, 07:57:44 PM
Quote from: Beefy on August 14, 2005, 08:36:16 PM

Is Bob Saget is the greatest person on the face of the planet? Looks possible.


I have seen Bob Saget do stand-up, and I have two words: Fucking. Awesome.

Imagine the speed with which Eddie Izzard does comedy. Now make him about 50,000 times dirtier, American, and not a cross-dresser. And taller. That about covers it.
with or without heels?
without

Jessie

Quote from: Beefy on August 15, 2005, 04:19:35 PM
On the topic of Kurt Cobain:

People think KC's importance comes from his body of work as a musician.  This has some merit, but is arguable.  His music was certainly responsible for ushering in a new wave of rawer, more genuinely emotional rock and roll after more than a decade of pop plasticity.  A lot of the more sludgy aspects of Nirvana's music was clearly in direct response to all that shallowness.

Where his real value was, which most people missed, was that he was a spokesperson for an entire generation who until that moment didn't feel like it had a voice.  It was angry and uninterested and angsty and there was no room in popular society for it until Nirvana can screaming in with a sharp sound and wailingly honest emotion.  The tragedy of his death was that it was indicative of how a very large portion of modern youth at the time felt, but the older generation completely missed that.  His biggest importance was as a representative of a larger collective.  Something Kurt knew he had become, even though he did not like the mantle (of course he didn't).

When Kurt wasn't miserable he was capable of some really excellent songwriting.  When he was happy he managed some truly amazing musical moments.  Nirvana's Unplugged performance is a good example of this.  Despite it being for MTV, it gave Kurt an opportunity for his songwriting to really come forward, as well as a chance to share and promote some of his influences.

I've often wondered what the real follow up to Nevermind sounded like.  The one Kurt scrapped when the label scolded him for making too 'down' of a record, so he made one even worse.

I saw Nirvana play the Roseland in NYC on their last tour.  The show was very much like Cobain's personality - loud, raw, unhappy, and honest.  It was both tragic to watch and yet wonderful.  That was the last show I ever "moshed" at.

I don't think you have to like Cobain's music to see the significance he had in our pop culture.

You nailed it, Beefy. 

Watching that Unplugged now, knowing how close he was to suicide at the time... it makes me almost cry.  That was hands down the best Unplugged ever.  It was so raw and real and amazing.
we should have kept the quote pyramid up to rape Jessie in the face.

Listener

Quote from: eo000 on August 15, 2005, 08:58:38 PM
Quote from: Listener on August 15, 2005, 07:57:44 PM
Quote from: Beefy on August 14, 2005, 08:36:16 PM

Is Bob Saget is the greatest person on the face of the planet?  Looks possible.


I have seen Bob Saget do stand-up, and I have two words:  Fucking.  Awesome.

Imagine the speed with which Eddie Izzard does comedy.  Now make him about 50,000 times dirtier, American, and not a cross-dresser.  And taller.  That about covers it.
with or without heels?

Without.

dazie

Guess what's playing at Liberty Hall now... 
"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
I think so, Brain, but how will we get the Spice Girls into the paella?