Metallica
Out of context: Reply #43
- Started
- Last post
- 55 Responses
- ismith0
To me it almost seems that a current band is more likely to live on the quicker you dismiss them... 60s-80s were about how many stadiums you could sell out, and I just think that doesn't translates. I bet there were just as many empty-headed fools joining a crowd of millions to see the Beatles just to be cool without ever really listening to or caring about the music as there are people now who download all the albums and simply leave them on in the background...
I think our measurement of how popular bands were then is distorted by the fact that we're very inclusive when talking about them (what VJ doesn't like to point out the most obscure reference to a modern band taking the smallest influence possible from a band just to show their depth in the music industry...). We're very willing to glorify every inane detail of their existence, which gives us a false sense of status while also giving us a weird feeling of security (if all of the modern bands you like now end up sucking, it doesn't matter because you didn't care about them really! you really only deeply respected the classic bands!).
I would sell my soul for Pink Floyd, but if I were my age when they released Dark Side I'm sure it would be no different than the first time I heard the Strokes' Is This It, Rage Against the Machine's eponymous debut, John Frusciante's Shadows Collide With People, or Massive Attack's Mezzanine among many others. In 20 years, if the masses favor Rage and everyone forgets Shadows Collide (more than probable) then who knows– I might suddenly start calling Rage a classic band and not Frusciante/RHCP.