Is Pearl Jam the only band who rejected fame?

musicismylife78

Sure there have been bands who rejected mainstream success, who are opposed to the mainstream music industry, but Pearl jam is one of the only ones who I can think of, that were the biggest band in the world and intentionally sabotaged their own careers, put out non commercial singles Who You Are, and albums No Code, took on Ticketmaster when they had to know they were going to lose in court and lose millions of fans and millions of potential tour money etc...

Can anyone else think of a band or musician who intentionally sabotaged their own career?

Fugazi, and others were never the most popular band in the world and have always been the way they are.

I have heard Dylan intentionally made awful albums in order to lose fans, but other than that, I cant think of anyone else

covin

I don't think they've rejected fame. Lately, they've seemed to be embracing it more.

What they rejected was the status quo.

walkthamile

Led Zeppelin rejected alot of commercialism and did'nt make clips/do many interviews either and they were the biggest band in the world at that particular time. In many ways Pearl Jam's approach was very similar.

To the poster above, I would'nt say that they are embracing fame...but they are a little more accessable. They are still very much out of the mainstream and creating music and statements that are in the interests of their music and fans. They don't give a toss about mainstream exposure in the same way as most other bands today.

covin

You're right. Embracing is the wrong word. But they have been more open to using their fame to their advantage... whether that happens to be supporting causes they believe in, or promoting their work. They've happened to do it without changing their music and who they are, which is one of the reasons Pearl Jam has so much character.

South of Seattle

Your other favorite band "Arcade Fire" seem to be doing this aren't they Che?

Fitz

Echo & The Bunnymen have nearly always rejected fame. Great band like Pearl Jam to.

WaveRyder

musicismylife78 wrote:

Sure there have been bands who rejected mainstream success, who are opposed to the mainstream music industry, but Pearl jam is one of the only ones who I can think of, that were the biggest band in the world and intentionally sabotaged their own careers, put out non commercial singles Who You Are, and albums No Code, took on Ticketmaster when they had to know they were going to lose in court and lose millions of fans and millions of potential tour money etc...

Can anyone else think of a band or musician who intentionally sabotaged their own career?

Fugazi, and others were never the most popular band in the world and have always been the way they are.

I have heard Dylan intentionally made awful albums in order to lose fans, but other than that, I cant think of anyone else

I dont think PJ ever did anything to intentionally lose fans. They did it their way and if they lost some along the way, then so be it. To you're other points, I don't know. But Pearl Jam did do it on their own terms for the most part, which is cool and just one more reason to love the mofos.

WaveRyder

covin wrote:

I don't think they've rejected fame. Lately, they've seemed to be embracing it more.

What they rejected was the status quo.

+1

drummerboy_73

I think Nirvana was on a similar path, particularly with how they approached their MTV Unplugged gig - bringing on the Meat Puppets, playing obscure covers, playing few Nirvana "radio hits", etc. I think in PJ's case, it was partly trying to escape the limelight and get their feet back under them, as much as it was gravitating toward a less mainstream artistic direction. With Nirvana, I think it was more of a "punk" kind of ethos they were trying to maintain - downplaying their mainstream success and still trying to identify themselves as part of a scene or movement that was anti-commercialism.

On a bit of a side note, one musician I've been a fan of since the late 80's and have a lot of respect for is Mike Watt for his similar approach - not necessarily rejecting fame, but being so honest and down to earth about who he is and what he wants to do without regard to any outside influence whatsoever. I've seen him several times in the last few years with various projects, and they guy still drives himself around on tour in his white, Ford Econoline van (although he got a new one a few years ago!), hauling his gear and whatever bandmates he might be touring with, crashing at fan's houses, etc. He still wears the same old jeans and flannels when he plays - he's just a guy up there playing his heart and soul out with no conscious thought about his image, career, musical direction, etc. The guy just plays wicked cool music - and that's it. End of story.

pdalowsky

I'm
Fairly sure Radiohead did. When they went from world rock superstars to that electronic knob wankery overnight

Thing is they didn't lose their popularity. But them again I'm not sure pj ever did. I'm blinkered though so I guess they lost some mass appeal

Gary Carter

fugazi
sonic youth
the pixes
rem

those are a few bands to me that rejected fame

boyo79

Not a massive band but Brand New have certainly rejected fame. Hardly ever give interviews, do things their way and quite openly criticise the music biz. Top band though.

PilatesDogAR

I don't know that putting out No Code was sabotage. I love that album, and it's still in my top 3. For different reasons I guess. It's more of a contemplative album, and I dig that.

solace23

The who to some extent

SKELLER

Seriously... you need to take a step back a little. Rejected fame? Maybe in the beginning but last year they were sponsored by Target AND THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. So that's all out the window now.

I love pearl jam... don't get me wrong. But if you going to look for the ultimate band that "rejected fame" look no further then the Beatles. They stopped touring halfway through the band career.

Jason P

PilatesDogAR wrote:

I don't know that putting out No Code was sabotage. I love that album, and it's still in my top 3. For different reasons I guess. It's more of a contemplative album, and I dig that.

When No Code came out, I did not get the concept of the album. I listened to it a few times and then it collected dust for 2-3 years and I figured PJ was done for. But I gave it another chance and it ended up being my second favorite PJ album. Maybe it took some personal growth for me to appreciate it.

I don't no it was intentional sabotage, but it did turn away a lot of the early PJ fanbase, that's for certain. Some of my friends lost interest, and although they still like PJ, they don't follow them the same way. And it did kill their radio support as most stations today do not play anything past Vitalogy.

goldrush

The first person that springs to mind for me is Neil Young.

Firstly, in the 70s Neil said "Heart of Gold put me in the middle of the road. Traveling there soon became a bore, so I headed for the ditch. A rougher ride but I saw more interesting people there." After Danny Whitten died the "Ditch Trilogy" of albums were a concerted effort to avoid the mainstream and get out of the public eye.

He did a similar thing in the 80s when he signed for Geffen. How many other people do you know of that have been sued by their own record company for "making music unrepresentative of himself"?

Go To Fire 43

Harvey Danger rejected success. Does that count.

RedMosquito22

musicismylife78 wrote:

Sure there have been bands who rejected mainstream success, who are opposed to the mainstream music industry, but Pearl jam is one of the only ones who I can think of, that were the biggest band in the world and intentionally sabotaged their own careers, put out non commercial singles Who You Are, and albums No Code, took on Ticketmaster when they had to know they were going to lose in court and lose millions of fans and millions of potential tour money etc...

Can anyone else think of a band or musician who intentionally sabotaged their own career?

Fugazi, and others were never the most popular band in the world and have always been the way they are.

I have heard Dylan intentionally made awful albums in order to lose fans, but other than that, I cant think of anyone else

I would hardly consider a multi million dollar career sabotaged.

SomethingCreative

boyo79 wrote:

Not a massive band but Brand New have certainly rejected fame. Hardly ever give interviews, do things their way and quite openly criticise the music biz. Top band though.

Totally agree. Wasn't a big fan of their first album and how they fit into the whole "emo" scene, but they've since transformed themselves and become their own independant sound which I love. VERY instense live as well.

bigmattk11

goldrush wrote:

The first person that springs to mind for me is Neil Young.

Firstly, in the 70s Neil said "Heart of Gold put me in the middle of the road. Traveling there soon became a bore, so I headed for the ditch. A rougher ride but I saw more interesting people there." After Danny Whitten died the "Ditch Trilogy" of albums were a concerted effort to avoid the mainstream and get out of the public eye.

He did a similar thing in the 80s when he signed for Geffen. How many other people do you know of that have been sued by their own record company for "making music unrepresentative of himself"?

For sure. You see albums like "Trans", "Reactor", "Life" and think what was Neil doing. He was doing what he wanted to do. New styles. I believe hearing once that Neil himself didn't care for everything he did. He likes to keep it fresh.

mcthud

SKELLER wrote:

I love pearl jam... don't get me wrong. But if you going to look for the ultimate band that "rejected fame" look no further then the Beatles. They stopped touring halfway through the band career.

+1

AzWicker

SKELLER wrote:

Seriously... you need to take a step back a little. Rejected fame? Maybe in the beginning but last year they were sponsored by Target AND THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. So that's all out the window now.

I love pearl jam... don't get me wrong. But if you going to look for the ultimate band that "rejected fame" look no further then the Beatles. They stopped touring halfway through the band career.

They didn't reject fame, they just hated each other

Black73

bigmattk11 wrote:

goldrush wrote:

The first person that springs to mind for me is Neil Young.

Firstly, in the 70s Neil said "Heart of Gold put me in the middle of the road. Traveling there soon became a bore, so I headed for the ditch. A rougher ride but I saw more interesting people there." After Danny Whitten died the "Ditch Trilogy" of albums were a concerted effort to avoid the mainstream and get out of the public eye.

He did a similar thing in the 80s when he signed for Geffen. How many other people do you know of that have been sued by their own record company for "making music unrepresentative of himself"?

For sure. You see albums like "Trans", "Reactor", "Life" and think what was Neil doing. He was doing what he wanted to do. New styles. I believe hearing once that Neil himself didn't care for everything he did. He likes to keep it fresh.

Hey bigmatt, guessing you and I could now change our names to "After THE goldrush!" Gotta agree - Uncle Neil is the epitome of thrusting his middle finger at anyone who suggests he take a mainstream approach. Greendale is another album that pissed off some fans - I recall he played that album start to finish on the tour after its release. No Heart of Gold, no Old Man, no Needle, just carmichael and grandpa's interview.

Black73

AzWicker wrote:

SKELLER wrote:

Seriously... you need to take a step back a little. Rejected fame? Maybe in the beginning but last year they were sponsored by Target AND THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. So that's all out the window now.

I love pearl jam... don't get me wrong. But if you going to look for the ultimate band that "rejected fame" look no further then the Beatles. They stopped touring halfway through the band career.

They didn't reject fame, they just hated each other

We can all thank Yoko Ono for that!

WaveRyder

Go To Fire 43 wrote:

Harvey Danger rejected success. Does that count.

+1

Gary Carter

SomethingCreative wrote:

boyo79 wrote:

Not a massive band but Brand New have certainly rejected fame. Hardly ever give interviews, do things their way and quite openly criticise the music biz. Top band though.

Totally agree. Wasn't a big fan of their first album and how they fit into the whole "emo" scene, but they've since transformed themselves and become their own independant sound which I love. VERY instense live as well.

nice to see the love for brand new on here. probably my fave band from long island.