Red Mosquito

Did someone just claim to know 10,000 people?

cutuphalfdead wrote:Did someone just claim to know 10,000 people?

Yes, I did. I never write figuratively; everything I write should be taken at face value. Just like you are actually cut up and literally half dead.

MadTIGERmaN wrote:

PryTo wrote:

mastaflatch wrote:artistically, culturally and historically, many, many things are more important than selling out a 3000 seater.

Of course. In part it's funny because I know about 10,000 people who claim to have been at that concert. In part it's funny because Nirvana was not considered artistically, culturally, or historically important until after Cobain died. Yeah, I know they were the face of grunge, but that ship sailed after Nevermind faded from the public eye. Incesticide was barely noticed and In Utero got great reviews but was hardly a smash. In the U.S. it sold 180,000 copies the week it was released. Compare that to 950,000 copies of Vs. in just five days, released one month later. Again, I'm not equating sales with importance. My point is that Nirvana was not considered truly "important" until Cobain died. He was deemed retroactively important by the press and the fans, including the hordes who could have attended the In Utero tour but skipped it because Nirvana was no longer cool in late 1993/early 1994.

Im gonna totally agree with that.
Cobain and Morrison are both in that boat... their bands were just starting to decline in popularity and didnt really have a direction? (Dave was already starting to write/record songs that ended up with the Foos) if either of them live (Cobain/Morrison) who knows what happens, but by they both died, and became legends, bigger than they ever were.

Yep, good example. It happens all the time. Sort of like Michael Jackson went from creepy pedophile recluse to beloved awesome genius the second he passed.

I disagree with you in many ways in this thread, PryTo.

I knew Nirvana's time was limited when I first heard "In Utero". I thought it was trite and underwhelming...I didn't like it at all...so I can understand the sentiment that Nirvana was "no longer cool" in 1993. I find the revisionist history that "In Utero" is their all-time greatest masterpiece to be rather funny. That certainly wasn't the general consensus in 1993. Most of the Nirvana freaks I knew thought it was a depressing turd. A lot of the songs had been on bootlegs for years and didn't live up to their reputation. There was a good reason that Vs. sold far more copies than In Utero did. However, I did go to see them on the In Utero tour, so everybody who lost out on that can suck my dick.

Has your opinion of it changed over time, or do you still consider it bottom of the Nirvana heap?

Kevin Davis wrote:Has your opinion of it changed over time?

Not really.

PryTo wrote:

mastaflatch wrote:artistically, culturally and historically, many, many things are more important than selling out a 3000 seater.

Of course. In part it's funny because I know about 10,000 people who claim to have been at that concert. In part it's funny because Nirvana was not considered artistically, culturally, or historically important until after Cobain died. Yeah, I know they were the face of grunge, but that ship sailed after Nevermind faded from the public eye. Incesticide was barely noticed and In Utero got great reviews but was hardly a smash. In the U.S. it sold 180,000 copies the week it was released. Compare that to 950,000 copies of Vs. in just five days, released one month later. Again, I'm not equating sales with importance. My point is that Nirvana was not considered truly "important" until Cobain died. He was deemed retroactively important by the press and the fans, including the hordes who could have attended the In Utero tour but skipped it because Nirvana was no longer cool in late 1993/early 1994.

this is pretty much my recollection.

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:

Kevin Davis wrote:Has your opinion of it changed over time?

Not really.

You're one of the few Nirvana fans I know who holds that opinion. In Utero is my favorite Nirvana album and it is the favorite Nirvana album of most of my Nirvana-loving friends.

Also, while it might be revisionist history that people forget Nirvana was declining in popularity in 1993, they were still insanely popular - they just had a lot more competition, and a song like "Scentless Apprentice" wasn't ever going to appeal to the more meathead, bro-type elements of their fanbase. I think even if Kurt had lived they would have jumped to a different level of popularity when Unplugged was finally released.

Many famous artists weren't respected justly until they were gone... I don't think it matters how many albums they sold or how popular they were. All you have to do is listen to Kurt's contemporary peers, like Ed, Billy Corgan, Michael Stipe, etc...

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:I knew Nirvana's time was limited when I first heard "In Utero". I thought it was trite and underwhelming...I didn't like it at all...so I can understand the sentiment that Nirvana was "no longer cool" in 1993. I find the revisionist history that "In Utero" is their all-time greatest masterpiece to be rather funny. That certainly wasn't the general consensus in 1993. Most of the Nirvana freaks I knew thought it was a depressing turd. A lot of the songs had been on bootlegs for years and didn't live up to their reputation. There was a good reason that Vs. sold far more copies than In Utero did. However, I did go to see them on the In Utero tour, so everybody who lost out on that can suck my dick.

This is crazy! There are many great albums like this. Sometimes it takes a few listens to really get an album, and In Utero was one of those. But to foresee a band losing its edge and importance based on one listen to a new album... is pretty fucking shallow. PJ was definitely more in the forefront (reluctantly, my ass!) of the 90's rock renaissance... mainly because Kurt really didn't give a shit about being the spokesperson / frontman for a generation. That's something Eddie (reluctantly, Ha!) embraced, and it paid off for them BIGTIME! I can't see Kurt ever being able to enjoy the fame and fortune... I think Eddie said somewhere in a PJ20 interview clip, something about wishing he could go back and tell him how awesome the lifestyle was... "I think he would have enjoyed it." No, Eddie... I don't think he would have.

Iholdthepain wrote:This is crazy! There are many great albums like this. Sometimes it takes a few listens to really get an album, and In Utero was one of those. But to foresee a band losing its edge and importance based on one listen to a new album... is pretty fucking shallow.

Show me where I said that I only heard the album once.

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:I knew Nirvana's time was limited when I first heard "In Utero". I thought it was trite and underwhelming...I didn't like it at all...so I can understand the sentiment that Nirvana was "no longer cool" in 1993. I find the revisionist history that "In Utero" is their all-time greatest masterpiece to be rather funny. That certainly wasn't the general consensus in 1993. Most of the Nirvana freaks I knew thought it was a depressing turd. A lot of the songs had been on bootlegs for years and didn't live up to their reputation. There was a good reason that Vs. sold far more copies than In Utero did. However, I did go to see them on the In Utero tour, so everybody who lost out on that can suck my dick.

I have no idea how many times you have heard the album, but the above statement reads like a snap-judgement. When was the last time you listened to In Utero? Who knows, maybe it has aged like a fine wine. Those older songs, like Pennyroyal Tea and Rape Me, I thought they were captured really well on the album... Obviously, they're nothing like the live versions, but the recordings were great... to me.

And while I'm thinking about it... no Nirvana Thread would be complete without this glorious moment:



After this show, that bouncer chased Kurt and the others down Elm Street in Deep Ellum. They jumped in a cab and he busted a window out as they drove away... so the story goes. Also, during the "bullshit" break, Kurt was spotted in a small closet, chasing the dragon... as it was written.

Good Times!

In Utero is definitely their best album in my eyes. As a collection of songs it just slays their first two.

And the sound. My god, the sound. In Utero is more hammer of the gods than most Zeppelin records.

Iholdthepain wrote: I have no idea how many times you have heard the album, but the above statement reads like a snap-judgement. When was the last time you listened to In Utero? Who knows, maybe it has aged like a fine wine. Those older songs, like Pennyroyal Tea and Rape Me, I thought they were captured really well on the album... Obviously, they're nothing like the live versions, but the recordings were great... to me.

I heard it again when the Deluxe came out, for the 1,000th time ever probably. I still don't like it very much. The songs are very weak. I didn't know at the time how many of them were Nevermind leftovers, but it made sense later when I found out. And the whole "In Utero" experience takes me back to a time when I was really depressed and listening to a lot of Leonard Cohen, smoking cigarettes in my bedroom with the shades pulled down. I went to see Nirvana when they came thorough town and Kurt was in primo rock-star-hissy-fit mode and was just a miserable cunt throughout the whole show. And then Kurt's death unfortunately solidified that vibe. It was a depressing time for me, and that album doesn't exactly fill me with happiness. Back then, if I needed to be lifted up, I would listen to Ween or The Frogs or Frank Zappa...something funny yet intellectually stimulating. Nirvana was pretty much over for me at that point, though I did enjoy the Unplugged show.

Years later, when I took place in a Nirvana tribute (I was Kurt!), all of the songs we did were from Nevermind and Incesticide. I had no interest in playing any of the In Utero songs.

Regardless, this is all just my opinion and personal experience, as I lived through it. So don't soil your panties or anything.

what in utero songs were nevermind leftovers?

This thing about Nirvana not being important until Cobain died doesn't ring true to me. I remember my parents driving me to school this morning and Cobain's death made the local news. I was not in Seattle, I was not in the US, I was in a small non English-speaking town the other side of the Western world. This isn't the place where you'd hear about some random musician dying, you'd only hear about the passing of the MJ's or Whitney Houston's of this world. If Eddie Vedder had shot all this band before killing himself back then no one in this kind of media would have talked about it. We'd hear about this big new music thing coming from Seattle but Nirvana was the only name.

I think the rest of the world's relationship with Nirvana and Pearl Jam was a bit reversed from the US's at that point.

stip wrote:what in utero songs were nevermind leftovers?

Rape Me
Dumb
All Apologies
Frances Farmer
Pennyroyal Tea
Radio Friendly Unit Shifter