Moon Pix

I read something a while ago about Nirvana that I thought was really interesting but have never really had an oppurtunity to discuss it with anybody. It was about the fact that the band had recorded a cover of some Kiss song for a various artists compilation album and what it basically said was that British fans found this unthinkable coming from a punk band like Nirvana. Unthinkable because Nirvana and the underground had come to represent a kind of righteous political correctness in rock music that was oppossed to the sexist and homphobic glam bands and hard rock bands that had come before. Most of those bands had no political or social consciousness but bands like Nirvana and Pearl Jam did and so the idea of Kurt Cobain fessing up to actually liking bands like Kiss and Aerosmith seemed at odds somehow. Apparently this attitude didnt hold any sway in America because Generation X had already grown up on Kiss, Aerosmith and AC/DC among others before they even heard punk whereaes in Britain the emergence of punk and impact was immediate and so the lines where drawn between metalheads and punks from the get go.

Being British myself I can definitely how such a thing can take hold of somebody and in fact for a few years I found it all but impossible to enjoy that style of music simply because of all the sexism, duh duh dumbness and spandex tights. It seemed ridiculous to me and unreal whereaes indie rock seemed far more genuine. The conclusion Ive come to is that it is more genuine and artistic than most of the glam bands of the '80s and the hard rock bands of the '70s. Whos going to be taken more seriously, the guy in a flannel shirt and jeans or Dee Snyder? What Ive come to realise though of late is that the point of hard rock and glam is that the music isnt to be taken seriously nor is the whole mentality of it. Its just dumb fun. Its dumb fun in the same way that the Ramones where or the garage bands where. The Ramones where not to be taken seriously and once you realise that its a lot easier to enjoy their music. You can't judge them with the same criteria as you might judge a Can album or a Velvet Underground one because those bands were trying to make artistic statements. I kind of think thats one of the illogical things about the way indie rockers, including myself at one time, perceive hard rock. They don't realise that those bands arent doing it to be great artists or be taken seriusly. Its just dumb fun.

It feels silly writing this because its obvious. Im doing it though because I kind of fell for the same trap that people did in the '70s and the early '90s. When punk came along young kids sold their Yes and Cream albums because it was outdated and out of touch. When Nirvana came along and made it impossible for Warrant to get a video on MTV anymore the same thing happened. If you can look past all the sexist song lyrics and stupid outfits some of that stuff is pretty good music. Some of AC/DC's stuff is pretty good and so is Twisted Sister. Ill draw the line with Bon Jovi and Van Halen but plenty of good stuff on the other side of the line. Its not as heady or arty as something by Beefheart or somebody but it has its own merits.

__________________
There’s a dream that I see, I pray it can be
Look 'cross the land, shake this land - "Maybe Not", C. Marshall