Dark Matter: Official Album Thread

[tragabigzanda]

pearl jam sucks now

[ABNorman]

Raise your hand if you still hold the same idealistic views you did when you were in your mid-20's?

* raises hand* If anything I’ve become more committed to social justice and human rights causes. The difference is I understand better how things work and where and how to place my energy. And I’ve developed a better understanding and acceptance of how to live within what society demands and able to better hold the beauty and the terrible things in the world simultaneously.

Same. But how I measure that energy/resource expenditure becomes moving target, and thus far these new songs don’t warrant my expenditure given the ethical compromises I’d be making.

Just the expenditure of a coupla thousand posts about 'em.

[Tj]

I don't really care about human rights or any of that bullshit. Mainly I am concerned with making sure the water isn't left running.

[tragabigzanda]

pearl jam sucks now

[tragabigzanda]

pearl jam sucks now

[VinylGuy]

Oh no trag is talking about SNL here now?

Please mods enough is enough

[WaitingForBluey]

Of all the things to be concerned or pissed off about in our world today, none of the grievances mentioned in this thread are even on the map. Thus, these are not concerns that elicit a single ounce of my ire.

Unless, of course, you assume that Ticketmaster is being run by satanic, sex trafficking pedophiles.

[stip]

You guys see the headlines about Ramy Youssef's SNL monologue last night? It got me thinking a bit...

I generally hate when celebrities try to weigh in on global/political/culture wars issues when they've otherwise never touched them in their public life, or when their creative output hasn't really dovetailed with those issues. Like, I love Bill Hader, but I really don't care who he's voting for, because political insight has never been part of the Bill Hader product.

Simultaneously, there are some successful creative types -- Pearl Jam, Ramy Youssef, Fugazi, Tim Robbins, The Beatles, Kid Rock, Ted Nugent, etc. -- who's creative output has often had a direct connection to their political/social ideology, and that's always been part of what they're selling. I think I measure their output somewhat differently; I'd be really bummed if tomorrow Ramy Youssef woke up and was like "No more jokes about religion, from here on out it's all observational comedy because I'm all about that money."

And yet the grand failure of Pearl Jam's global/political/culture wars commitments seems to come down to:

1. 10% of the the tickets being subject to market forces
2. Making too many vinyl variants in service of Record Store Day


Maybe this truly matters to you. But Pearl Jam's core commitments in their music have been to democracy, community, environmentalism, anti-war advocacy, and reproductive rights. They are good lefty progressives, but they aren't class warriors. I kind of wish they were, but they got too successful too quickly to really develop an authentic voice there, and most of their attempts to do so (within their music) rank among some of their weaker efforts. They are humanists, not socialists (though you can be both). Their philosophy ultimately boils down to 'try and treat people well, give everyone space to live their lives, and when you make a mistake try and do better next time (which is much much easier to say than do).

Other than a small handful of outlier moments Pearl Jam's music has never called for moral purity or doctrinal perfection. It's done the opposite. And they've made plenty of choices I don't know that i would have made (given the information and context we actually have), over the course of a thirty plus year career, with the added handicap of much of their decision making being subject to public scrutiny with incomplete information. In aggregate, which is the primary way anyone should engage in questions of moral worth, they have done far more good than harm in the course of their careers, and even now.

[Ms Harmless]

Stip, did you see the post where I gave you the trans context you asked for?

[tragabigzanda]

pearl jam sucks now

[WaitingForBluey]

Pearl Jam took on TM at a time in their career when they were the biggest band in the world. People paid attention to it. And it ended up amounting to nothing (other than being something that PJ fans could be proud of). If they tried something similar now, would anyone pay attention?

Maybe Taylor Swift should be the target of your ire? If she stood up to TM, people would pay attention.

[stip]

I do agree that if you make certain causes part of your musical identity it raises the stakes. Having said that, arguing in a hyperbolic and nearly completely disingenuous way (see your comments earlier today about Kid Rock and Billie Eilish) is a shame, because there are interesting and arguably even important conversations to have here.

[Ms Harmless]

Stip, did you see the post where I gave you the trans context you asked for?

I missed this, could you please re-post?

you can scroll up

[stip]

Stip, did you see the post where I gave you the trans context you asked for?

I did, thank you. Didn't have a follow up comment - seemed self-explanatory

[Ms Harmless]

Stip, did you see the post where I gave you the trans context you asked for?

I did, thank you. Didn't have a follow up comment - seemed self-explanatory

[stip]

and they explicitly said trans rights, which makes me happy

This feels like it needs just the slightest bit of context?

Mike posted a photo with a trans fan captioned "protect trans kids" on Facebook a while ago, and there is a photo somewhere with Jeff wearing a beanie hat in trans pride flag colours

here you go, Trag

[tragabigzanda]

pearl jam sucks now

[stip]

when they do, they give them a few extra posters

[Ms Harmless]

it's not giving money to trans causes (that we know of) but it is publicly nailing their colours to the mast and expressing allyship and support; the deliberate mention of trans kids in particular means a great deal as a trans adult who was a trans kid too unsafe to be out; the more artists normalise being trans, the safer it is for us to exist, at all ages; so is it everything? no; is it performative? it could be, if they behaved in ways that contradicted it (and we don't know about that, but to my knowledge, they haven't); I have very little doubt that they have trans people in their circle, whether that be in their wider families, friends circle, or work dealings; most people do

I would love to see Pearl Jam giving to grassroots trans causes and hiring trans people, but we don't know that they aren't, and if they felt they had to prove it, that in itself could be performative (a lot of us don't want to be paraded around by celebs as "the face" of our group in a political fight; we fight quietly in our everyday lives)

[Ms Harmless]

considering they're an old "legacy band" (most of whom end up coming out as queerphobes and transphobes), I don't take the little they're doing to say they're different lightly