Via Xmastime buddy Kiko Jones I see an article wherein people are asked to name bands that should have been bigger.
It's a hard question to answer - obviously, any band someone loves thinks that band should be bigger. Do I think Matthew Sweet should be bigger, like one of the guys does? Of course not; I'm amazed he got as big as he did.
And then you have the different levels of such bands. For instance, as you know my favorite band over the last 10+ years is Marah, who have spent the last 15 years slugging it out from shitty bar to shitty bar while putting out the best records in the country and being the best live band you'll ever see, and they'll probably hafta do it for a long time, not cashing in enough to buy yachts and play The Garden. They've played Conan twice and have appeared with Bruce at the Meadowlands, and STILL they're fucking scrapping it out every day.
On another level there was The Replacements, critical darlings that every rock band lists as an influence that sold zero records while they were together; I spent a great deal of my high school days along with The Gnat begging people to listen to them, but few could be bothered. They were on a major label and played Saturday Night Live back when that meant something and still nobody cared, and yet if they reunited for a tour today they'd fill Michigan Stadium. When they were actually together, they should've been way, WAY bigger.
Then there's The Ramones. You won't meet a person alive who hasn't heard of The Ramones. And yet there's more baby onesies being sold today with the iconic Ramones logo than there were records sold when they were together. They were on a major label from Day One and WERE FEATURED IN A FUCKING MOVIE, and nobody cared. Meanwhile, if they hadn't all died and came together for a single show the Earth would stop spinning so it could watch. And yet when they were actually together, nobody bought the records. They should've been way, WAY bigger, second only to The Beatles.
So the perspective of the whole idea is weird. Again, I guess it all goes back to "bands that should've been bigger" = "bands I like." Hell, Beatles fans are still miffed The Beatles run of #1 singles stopped when Strawberry Fields Forever got held in the 2 hole by fucking Engelbert Humperdink, so.
3 comments:
I disagree with you on both The Replacements and The Ramones. Here's why:
The 'Mats purposely sabotaged their chances of being big and their cult is pretty substantial, so you can't put them in the same category as the bands I mentioned, for example, who pursued a wider audience to no avail AND are known only to a handful of music geeks.
The Ramones on the other hand, as catchy as many of their tunes are, never made what could be considered commercial mainstream music, so in terms of an audience they got as big as they could. Plus, they are an iconic, influential band on par, in that sense, with another set of NYC cult legends: The Velvet Underground.
IMO, this latter characteristic disqualifies any band from this particular conversation. An icon is an icon, even if their domain is the underground. Which is why your boys in Marah, however, are a perfect example of what the gist of the article was aiming for.
That AV Club list is great as it is - I think my favorite power pop is well represented + Whiskeytown even. If Xmas puts the Mats on his list (and they deserve every possible kudo and the millions thrown at on the whole alternative/grunge/indie rock genre), then the Pixies may need to top any such list as well.
Maybe marah represents the Band Who Earned More Than the World Gave them list.
Here's what I wanna know, are Dave and Serge topics of discussion? If not, then we'll keep it to mainstream margins.If so, those two outrageous bastards are in my top two. Kids in Philly is the best record of the last 20 years.
Post a Comment