Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Draft Dodger
Nirvana and Cobain had some good stuff, and were certainly influential. But they didn't come close to earning the level of reverance they have. Very very overrated.
They had a couple good albums and, like almost every other band in history, they would have followed them up with some mediocre albums to balance things out. Instead, Cobain offed himself and the band is held on a pedestal.
If Perry Ferrell had died after Nothing's Shocking, Jane's Addiction would be revered in the same light. Instead, they had a so-so album, broke up, formed bad side bands, put together a crappy leftovers album, and regrouped to put out a monstrously bad album. They are remembered as a band that had some great moments, but not one of the all time greats, and that's how Nirvana/Cobain would be remembered as well if he hadn't been such a coward.
|
I agree that this is closer than what Kodos said. I think this has happened in every era and in every genre, so I guess it is human nature. I recall that those of us in the 20s and 30s in the late 80s/early90s were just flipping the channel whenever Smells like Teen Spirit played on MTV for the millionth time, while the kids were eating this up thinking they were doing hardcore rebellion. Nirvana's album (pick one) may be important in the history of rock thing but that doesn't make them good, just being at the right place at the right time.