Cobain Rumors: "biggest band in the world"

DewieCox

dpmay wrote:

DewieCox wrote:

Yeah, there's alot of bias towards PJ on here, but isn't that to be expected. I don't think any of it really comes from jealousy. I mean, look at PJ's body of work compared to Nirvana's.

in fairness, the entire nirvana catalog was produced before cobain was as old as, say, eddie vedder was when vs. was recorded. so the real comparison is between the entire nirvana catalog and ten and a handful of miscellaneous songs. i think i know what i prefer given that choice.

In fairness?? I think that would be comparing their entire catalog and their live shows.

musicismylife78 wrote:

DewieCox wrote:

Nobody ever said he was greedy. I just don't buy that he was so against being famous and having jocks into his music. As you point out there's ways to combat being famous. Step 1 for Kurt shoulda been to not go on MTV every time they rang him up.

As for racists, homophobes and people that kicked their ass ....What artist wants them as fans?

Maybe he got more famous than he really wanted, but I think you'd have to be pretty gullible to think it was really anything more than trying to live up to an image.

one neednt go far to come up with examples of musicians who have struggled with being famous and having money as a result of it. Ed is an obvious example. its pretty evident the grunge scene and the resulting fame and attention, caused a great deal of pain and soul searching for ed. and we;ve heard for years, ed suggest that kurts death was symbolic for ed personally because he (ed) felt he was headed down that same road. I see no difference between the philosophies of art and integrity between kurt and ed. they were very similar.

ive always been an either or person. either you believe ed and kurt both are liars, which is absurd, or both struggled with fame because it was uncomfortable and something that caused deep pain.

PJ hated the publicity and fame machine early on, and hated the commercialization of rock and their music, but they still could be seen playing the MTV music awards and doing interviews with RS and Spin. Isnt that contradictary? If ed didnt want the pressure why was he appearing on spin in 1994? And thats not a jab a ed. i respect him and his approach to the issue of celebrity

I find it pretty absurd to think that anyone would question kurts authenticity on the issue. He felt guilty, he felt intense pressure. He was in the biggest band in the world, and was the figurehead of a cultural movement and had millions of teens hanging on every word he said. Im his age when he died. and ive struggled for years to define myself and my purpose in life. I cant imagine, on top of that struggle, to have that big of a spotlight and that much pressure on oneself. And then of course he was a drug user and i think he felt guilty about that as well.

I do think he was thinking of quitting music, or of going off in some wierd eperimental direction ala radiohead. they were pulling out of lollapalooza before his death, and i think he was tired of being this figure to people.

He sadly didnt know how to deal with that, or to deal with it in a constructive and positive way. But as i said, he was only 27. Im 27 and my life is a wreck. Why do we expect rock stars and artists to have it all together? and to understand everything? i think they are working through the same issues we all do, except publicly.

I think you arent looking at the issue correctly if you come away from the kurt cobain story, and come away from it thinking he was insincere, or a liar or that he secretly craved fame. he was conflicted. and we all are. Im a radical commie anarchist, but i love blockbuster summer movies just like everyone else.

The fact of the matter is PJ pulled back from the spotlight and Cobain never did. I think PJ was trying to be as successful as they could be while retaining a certain comfort level after it got away from them. I'm not saying he loved being a celebrity or anything like that, but to me it looks like he wanted to be in the most successful band in the world and went about it the best way he knew how.

I'm gonna go ahead and look at the facts. You can believe what you want.

musicismylife78

DewieCox wrote:

Nobody ever said he was greedy. I just don't buy that he was so against being famous and having jocks into his music. As you point out there's ways to combat being famous. Step 1 for Kurt shoulda been to not go on MTV every time they rang him up.

As for racists, homophobes and people that kicked their ass ....What artist wants them as fans?

Maybe he got more famous than he really wanted, but I think you'd have to be pretty gullible to think it was really anything more than trying to live up to an image.

he was rejecting an image others had of him, as some posterchild and spokesman for gen x, and had an internal and personal image that he felt he wanted to live up to. I think his own image of himself, was he was a politically aware, sensitive, artist type, who grew up attracted to punk rock because it had something to say, not necessarily because of how it sounded.

kurt was the "typical" artist, or the classical one. sensitive, piesces, identified with the female side of nature, saw art as an escape and as a way to say something important. this was a musician who communicated feelings so adeptly. Spending the last 20 seconds of Teen Spirit screaming "A denial" is so shocking for its honesty. i love art like that. you dont need to understand the term, or what was being denied or who was being denied, it was clear this was something kurt truely felt in his whole being.

and when it became clear, when you have that many fans, i think their are expectations that are extremely tough on an artist and on people in general. i think he struggled with how to deal with that label of spokesman of a generation. to know that what you sing in a 3 minute song could save someones life etc... and to deal with all the negatives of the press and interviews and expectations.

ive long suggested the music industry, should stop trying to fine illegal downloaders and should require all record contracts to have a part that says the record company will pay for rehab or treatment or counseling or whatever for their artists.

as much as we all wish kurt was here with us today, well maybe people on this board dont wish he was here. i do. and i never was one of those people who blamed him or hated him for his death. i think that was the overarching theme of the whole issue for kurt, and it followed him in death. people expected things of him, and to expect someone who is 27 to have the answers and to be able to sort everything out, thats asking alot.

musicismylife78

DewieCox wrote:

dpmay wrote:

DewieCox wrote:

Yeah, there's alot of bias towards PJ on here, but isn't that to be expected. I don't think any of it really comes from jealousy. I mean, look at PJ's body of work compared to Nirvana's.

in fairness, the entire nirvana catalog was produced before cobain was as old as, say, eddie vedder was when vs. was recorded. so the real comparison is between the entire nirvana catalog and ten and a handful of miscellaneous songs. i think i know what i prefer given that choice.

In fairness?? I think that would be comparing their entire catalog and their live shows.

musicismylife78 wrote:

DewieCox wrote:

Nobody ever said he was greedy. I just don't buy that he was so against being famous and having jocks into his music. As you point out there's ways to combat being famous. Step 1 for Kurt shoulda been to not go on MTV every time they rang him up.

As for racists, homophobes and people that kicked their ass ....What artist wants them as fans?

Maybe he got more famous than he really wanted, but I think you'd have to be pretty gullible to think it was really anything more than trying to live up to an image.

one neednt go far to come up with examples of musicians who have struggled with being famous and having money as a result of it. Ed is an obvious example. its pretty evident the grunge scene and the resulting fame and attention, caused a great deal of pain and soul searching for ed. and we;ve heard for years, ed suggest that kurts death was symbolic for ed personally because he (ed) felt he was headed down that same road. I see no difference between the philosophies of art and integrity between kurt and ed. they were very similar.

ive always been an either or person. either you believe ed and kurt both are liars, which is absurd, or both struggled with fame because it was uncomfortable and something that caused deep pain.

PJ hated the publicity and fame machine early on, and hated the commercialization of rock and their music, but they still could be seen playing the MTV music awards and doing interviews with RS and Spin. Isnt that contradictary? If ed didnt want the pressure why was he appearing on spin in 1994? And thats not a jab a ed. i respect him and his approach to the issue of celebrity

I find it pretty absurd to think that anyone would question kurts authenticity on the issue. He felt guilty, he felt intense pressure. He was in the biggest band in the world, and was the figurehead of a cultural movement and had millions of teens hanging on every word he said. Im his age when he died. and ive struggled for years to define myself and my purpose in life. I cant imagine, on top of that struggle, to have that big of a spotlight and that much pressure on oneself. And then of course he was a drug user and i think he felt guilty about that as well.

I do think he was thinking of quitting music, or of going off in some wierd eperimental direction ala radiohead. they were pulling out of lollapalooza before his death, and i think he was tired of being this figure to people.

He sadly didnt know how to deal with that, or to deal with it in a constructive and positive way. But as i said, he was only 27. Im 27 and my life is a wreck. Why do we expect rock stars and artists to have it all together? and to understand everything? i think they are working through the same issues we all do, except publicly.

I think you arent looking at the issue correctly if you come away from the kurt cobain story, and come away from it thinking he was insincere, or a liar or that he secretly craved fame. he was conflicted. and we all are. Im a radical commie anarchist, but i love blockbuster summer movies just like everyone else.

The fact of the matter is PJ pulled back from the spotlight and Cobain never did. I think PJ was trying to be as successful as they could be while retaining a certain comfort level after it got away from them. I'm not saying he loved being a celebrity or anything like that, but to me it looks like he wanted to be in the most successful band in the world and went about it the best way he knew how.

I'm gonna go ahead and look at the facts. You can believe what you want.

well i deal in the truth. both bands expressed dislike of fame and press, and both were on magazines and in interviews and on tv and did videos. both bands did. both kurt and ed did. i see no difference. You read that article in spin in 1994 with ed, called lets get lost or something like that? he;s clearly at his breaking point. he talks about kids writing him and asking for help with their own situations, asking ed to help them deal with their own issues. Yet he;s on the cover and being interviewed and being sold on the cover of a magazine which at that time was widely read by millions of teens and adults. How is that not the same thing? How about the fact that the album that was created to lose them fans, was also released and backed and promoted by a major label?

Ive never understood the whole cobain bashing. Plus, to suggest they wanted to be the biggest band in the world is to suggest you stopped paying attention to the band from 1993 until the end. In Utero aint some poppy radio friendly album, its abrasive and hard and raw. Even the choice of Albini to produce is evidence of this.

I think you are dilluded if you think kurt was motivated to be some sort of rock star. It just doesnt play out with the facts. He's comflicted, absolutely constradictory? yep, he was. but i'm not gonna swallow that lie that he was out to be some rich rock star and that this was somehow the reason he created songs like teen spirit, or something in the way. stuff like that doesnt get created by someone who is ego and vain and money driven. or if it does its disposible and forgotten about

musicismylife78

also how does careerist ambitions equal in utero and incesticide and the many covers of a then unknown band called the meat puppets and the vaselines on the unplugged record?

i think one has to seperate the notion of biggest band in the world, from people who lie awake at night and want to get rich and famous and want to be tabloid fodder, and those who want their art to reach as many people as possible.

i do think its laughable that pj is viewed as courting fame then pushing it away, and then courting it again with a sense of their own morals and ethics, but kurt is viewed as wanting to be in the biggest band in the world and is obsessed with getting his videos played. i dont really think its that simple...

dpmay

DewieCox wrote:

dpmay wrote:

DewieCox wrote:

Yeah, there's alot of bias towards PJ on here, but isn't that to be expected. I don't think any of it really comes from jealousy. I mean, look at PJ's body of work compared to Nirvana's.

in fairness, the entire nirvana catalog was produced before cobain was as old as, say, eddie vedder was when vs. was recorded. so the real comparison is between the entire nirvana catalog and ten and a handful of miscellaneous songs. i think i know what i prefer given that choice.

In fairness?? I think that would be comparing their entire catalog and their live shows.

i was just suggesting that if pearl jam had ended when its members were the age cobain was when he died, they would not have left the same kind of legacy that nirvana has.

is pearl jam "better" than hendrix because he produced relatively few albums? hell, are the rolling stones better than the beatles because their career has been like five times as long?

megatron

i think this sums it up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FklUAoZ6KxY

fife

i was just suggesting that if pearl jam had ended when its members were the age cobain was when he died, they would not have left the same kind of legacy that nirvana has.

is pearl jam "better" than hendrix because he produced relatively few albums? hell, are the rolling stones better than the beatles because their career has been like five times as long?[/quote]

I don't think in terms of being a band longer but something has to be said about a band that stays together for long period of times. Every artist career's has ups and downs. Nirvana had a very short career and Kurt killed himself at their peck. Nirvana never had that slump that every band has and that is a reason i believe why Nirvana are looked upon as greats. We don't know what Nirvana would have been if Kurt didn't die.

Bob dylan in my opinion is the greatest artist of all time and the reason is that he produced great music for decades. that is the what a makes a legend

dpmay

fife wrote:

dpmay wrote:

i was just suggesting that if pearl jam had ended when its members were the age cobain was when he died, they would not have left the same kind of legacy that nirvana has.

is pearl jam "better" than hendrix because he produced relatively few albums? hell, are the rolling stones better than the beatles because their career has been like five times as long?

I don't think in terms of being a band longer but something has to be said about a band that stays together for long period of times. Every artist career's has ups and downs. Nirvana had a very short career and Kurt killed himself at their peck. Nirvana never had that slump that every band has and that is a reason i believe why Nirvana are looked upon as greats. We don't know what Nirvana would have been if Kurt didn't die.

Bob dylan in my opinion is the greatest artist of all time and the reason is that he produced great music for decades. that is the what a makes a legend

good points. especially about dylan - totally the most important figure in popular american music over the past 50 or 60 years.

musicismylife78

dylan is one of the most important musicians in history, period. but he's another person that this applies to. in 1966, he was at the center of what kurt and ed were in the middle of in 1994. Dylan, was viewed as the spokesman of a generation, and was being hounded by fans and press alike. he went electric and people flipped their lids, and went insane. he was viewed as a traitor by the same people who branded him a national hero. he was called judas onstage, for going electric. it had a HUGE impact on him

in 1966 dylan crashed his motorcycle in a near death accident. It has long been wondered whether this was indeed a crash, and was the result of him being under so much stress at the time, or if dylan intentionally crashed knowing that he could be left alone, and he disappeared for awhile after that. John Wesley Harding is a very different album than Blonde on Blonde or anything before it. Or if he in fact never got in a crash at all and wasnt riding at all, and just made the story up.

the point being, had dylan died in 1966, having "only" released, Freewheelin, Times, Another Side, Bringing it all Back, Highway 61, Blonde on Blonde...he'd be viewed as one of the most important people of the 60's, just as he is today.

Its boggling to me someone would suggest morrison, joplin, hendrix, james dean, or cobain, dying young was the reason they are beloved. You listen to any of those musicians at all? you see dean act at all?
"

Cool Face Ryan

love Nirvana, all their stuff. But the only reason they are looked at the way the are is because Cobain blew his face off.

DewieCox

musicismylife78 wrote:

Its boggling to me someone would suggest morrison, joplin, hendrix, james dean, or cobain, dying young was the reason they are beloved. You listen to any of those musicians at all? you see dean act at all?
"

Why is that so hard to understand? It doesn't diminish their accomplishments while they were alive. Nobody is saying these people aren't great, but to say that their legends haven't been heightened by an early death is laughable. Yes, there's several other more primary reasons that those people are legends, but the what ifs will come up in almost every in depth conversation you're gonna have about them.

tcaporale

Obviously Cobain's death heightened his fame, it's just the nature of the beast.

Look at somebody like Nick Drake. He was virtually unknown when he was alive, but now he's viewed as one of the most influential singer-songwriters.

I agree with musicismylife78 that Cobain wasn't a hypocrite. Every band that becomes popular has to juggle fame with integrity. It's gotta be difficult to accomplish. It's clear that he wasn't a simple man...I read a book on Cobain and Nirvana and anything that came out of this guy's mouth was interesting. He was just one of those people who can't help but attract others to him even if he didn't necessarily want that to happen.

The notion that someone made on the first page that stated that if Cobain hadn't died he would be viewed in the same light as someone like Scott Weiland...are you goddamn kidding me? Gotta be one of the more ludicrous things I've read on here.

dpmay

yeah, i like the dylan comparison. i've always thought there were some parallels. right down to sound of their voices. cobain's voice in interviews and stuff always sounds to me like dylan, when he would speak in the first part of the 60s. just the tone, you know.

musicismylife78

dpmay wrote:

yeah, i like the dylan comparison. i've always thought there were some parallels. right down to sound of their voices. cobain's voice in interviews and stuff always sounds to me like dylan, when he would speak in the first part of the 60s. just the tone, you know.

if i remember correctly dylan himself respected kurt. dylan is known for his intense dislike of modern music, and i thought i remember reading that dylan saw kurt live and said something like "god that kid has heart".

off topic but dylans hatred of modern music has always posed an interesting thought in my mind. He obviously is pretty proud of jakob one would assume, but i wonder if he likes the band on their sound as well?

dylans a funny guy. I remember hearing he was a fan of Everlong.

pjl44

inlet13 wrote:

I sincerely believe he would have been no more famous or legendary than Scott Weiland or Chris Cornell had he not taken his own life.

Disagree. He (and Eddie, for that matter) were/are on a different plane than Weiland or Cornell. It's difficult to chicken-and-the-egg it and figure how much was the popularity of the band and how much was their charisma, but Cobain was already on a rare path.

pjl44

musicismylife78 wrote:

And the whole notion that dying young elevated kurt to mythical status is absurd, ive long heard that argument and its naive and silly. to believe it, you have to say, jimi, jim morrison, janis, brian jones, james dean, kurt etc.. all only are revered and loved because they died young. thats stupid. all were supremely talented and gifted and were masters

Nooooooo...I think there is definitely truth to that. Sad to say, but, if you check out early, it becomes easy to romanticize what could have been. They aren't solely revered and loved as a result of dying young, but because they burned hot in the short time we had with their art. Growing as an artist and remaining relevant is infinitely more difficult and, unfortunately, often under-appreciated.

red mos

I take that dylan hates modern music with a grain of salt. Sure he likes some modern bands. He was at the Grammy's playing with the Avett Brothers, and Mumford and sons. I have heard that too, but just thought him hating modern music was media fire frenzy.

I remeber reading thatinterview about Kurt too. I think "Polly" was the song Dylan was refering to."

pickupyourwill

bburpee wrote:

...

Yeah, Courtney, people think you're a crazy drug freak because you admit "I've never taken Special K or Ecstasy. I've been tempted . . . " Regular, non-drug users are never tempted to use Special K or Ecstasy. Ever. There's no way to remove that stigma because the regular 9-5ers cannot relate to being "tempted" by relatively hard drugs. This doesn't include weed, since basically nobody thinks stoners are Courtney Love-level crazy drug freaks.

...

This isn't calling out drug users as criminals, by the way. Drug users, do your thing... just don't be surprised when the bank tellers, school teachers, and insurance salesmen of the world (you know, the ones who have to pass drug tests to get their jobs) are shocked to hear that you were "tempted". It's different cultures.

I agree with the part about "you know, the ones who have to pass drug tests to get their jobs". Random drug tests are given in factories all over the country at any time. The holier-than-thou types continue to preach that alcohol is somehow better than weed, therefore legal. but that's getting off topic.

I like Courtney Love. I can relate to someone who has a stigma others won't let go of, long after you've stopped being that old person. I'm sure everyone could relate to that really. Maybe she's just going through a sensitive time in her life. She shouldn't care so much about the media.

OnWis97

Everyone knows that when all is said and one, Kurt will be the face of the 1990s "grunge movement." I happen to think his suicide is a huge part of that. Our memories are that Nirvana was everything and some of the others were riding their coat tales.

My memory is that PJ was more popular (not that that indicates that they were better...). Vs. outsold the hell out of In Utero. Sure, most who bought Vs. did not even consider buying Vitalogy, but during that interim, PJ was HUGE. And from what I've read, I think that bothered Kurt. He thought his music was great and that PJ's was horrible. He may have thought PJ sellouts for their more "polished" style and he may have had some frustration over that style being more popular.

Am I wrong? Was Nirvanna bigger? I know Nirvanna was first and there is no more important song than "teen spirit", but was Nevermind bigger than Ten? Was In Utero bigger than Vs.? My memory (and I was in high school during all this) is that PJ was bigger. But maybe I was biased, as one of the "simpletons" that like the polished corporate Rock of PJ.

I don't really need PJ to be the bigger band. It should not matter. However, I do think that unless I am totally wrong about that time, it lends evidence that Kurt's suicide leads to some extra praise...much of it from people that can not name a second song from Nevermind (and maybe even can name Alive, Jeremy, and Even Flow).

Most of this is not important. Both became famous (and probably wanted to), realized they did not like the fame, and wanted to back off. But I do feel that Eddie handled the media-created "competition" much better than Kurt.

pickupyourwill

DewieCox wrote:

Nobody ever said he was greedy. I just don't buy that he was so against being famous and having jocks into his music. As you point out there's ways to combat being famous. Step 1 for Kurt shoulda been to not go on MTV every time they rang him up.
...

I think its easy for people to say that he should have passed up all that money for the sake of being less famous, when they don't know what his financial situation was. I don't either, but just based on the fact that him and Courtney just had a baby and he had a family to provide for, plus still being somewhat new to fame--I think it is very reasonable that he would take as much money as he could get for fear of the future. Fame,the media, and the public will bring people up just as fast as they throw them back down. Its a rollercoaster ride it seems like--from the view of someone on the outside looking in (or inside looking out, whichever). It seems like most famous people cash in as much as they can at first--especially the starving artists who worked so hard to get there--because they want to be prepared for when they're not so famous. just my take on it anyway.