The "best band in the world" (cough)

sorry for the double post, but i forgot to add the "(cough) to indicate my snarky disapproval of this "feature."

That is probably the stupidest thing I have ever seen.

For me, it came down to Destiny's Child vs Outkast. Had to give it to the Atlanta boys.

Wow, who'd have thought that Esquire would have such a great selection to choose from?

GOOD NIGHT.

I got OutKast, who are not my favorite band. Hard to believe that U2's lead is so commanding.

Seeing a radiohead vs. rem matchup made me chuckle

I figure that the Radiohead vs Evanescence matchup in the first round was meant to be a gross mismatch. (and it is a mismatch, but not in the way they intended, I'm sure)

I really like my Destiny's/White Stripes/No Doubt/Hives semis! I mean, I wasn't expecting like Flare or Vitalic or Girls Aloud or anything.

Humans who like U2: WHO ARE YOU WHAT DO YOU WANT I HAVE MONEY PLEASE OH GOD

How'd the Wallflowers get on the fucking list?

first of all, that is awful.

that said, for me it came down to Wilco vs. Interpol & Radiohead vs. Flaming Lips. then i realized how much better three of those bands are better than interpol... so, i guess i learned something. woo-hoo.

forget about u2 for a sec. how the fuck did MAROON 5 get 5% of the vote?

I picked Outkast over the stripes.

does outkast even *exist*, strictly speaking?

They stole this idea from Freaky Trigger, where science decreed Smashing Pumpkins to be the worst band in the world.

i was shocked by the Marron 5 thing to... i guess shocked isn't the word.

...'sick', that's the word.

I ended up with a U2/YYYs matchup.

And, yes, I added to U2's commanding lead... what about it?!

I actually winced when I saw the line up.

The thing is, they've obviously tried very hard to throw a few 'indie obscurities' in like Interpol and the Yeah Yeah Yeahs. Bands only those ITK are aware of

Absolute toss

Ok, this is obviously so misguided a venture that it's a mistake to even comment on it. I'm going to anyway.

Ignoring the fact that the "Best Band in the World" is a bullshit concept (for a start, they obviously mean "Best Band in America"), what could be done to make this better? Who should be thrown out, and who should be thrown in?

The first glaring problem is that there's no indication of whether this should be "the band which is currently releasing the best music" or "the existing band which has had the best career". I guess the answer has to fall somewhere in between, since the first would require disqualifying any band whose last album was a slump, and the second would open open up countless bands who still exist, but haven't done anything worthwhile in years and years. So I would remove REM, Kiss, Aerosmith, Metallica, and Pearl Jam from the list, because how is including them any different from including, say, the Rolling Stones? I, personally, would also get rid of U2 and the Foo Fighters, who are shadows of their former selves, but are still successful and have plenty of defenders. I guess they can stay.

The second question is, what constitutes a band? From the majority of their choices, the answer is "groups (no Bob Dylan or Beck) who play instruments (no Clipse) and release albums under their name (no producers or backing bands)". And yet, they include Destiny's Child, who strictly sing, and Bright Eyes, which barely counts as a group. There's also a very strongly implied preference for rock bands (no Wu-Tang Clan) and bands that play "real" instruments (no Daft Punk or Basement Jaxx). And yet they include the Roots, who have a mediocre rapper, and Outkast, who mostly rely on... whatever the fuck you call it when it's not just "guys with guitars". There's also the hard-to-categorize Beastie Boys, who produced their last album and play instruments, but most of their best stuff relies on outside producers.

Obviously they didn't think this through, and instead just threw up a bunch of stuff that their mostly white, male, middle-class (not that there's anything wrong with that, speaking as a member) audience considers good. I'm going to do the thinking for them by keeping the first part of the definition (multiple people who play instruments) and ignoring the implied part (rock and "real" instruments). So, Destiny's Child and Bright Eyes must go. If they wanted to cover all of music, they could've just called it "Best Musical Entity" and made a more inclusive (and probably better) list.

Now that I've narrowed the list down through obsessive pedantry, let's throw out even more groups that don't deserve to be there. Maroon 5, Evanescence, and the Wallflowers get tossed immediately. At this point, they haven't proved they can be more than one-hit-wonders. I could do the same with Modest Mouse and the Flaming Lips, if I was cruel.

The question now is, what gets added? I'd prefer to see a list with the aforementioned Basement Jaxx and Daft Punk. Blur would be a good addition, but they're not going to get much support in the US. From bands that actually get radio play here, I'd at least choose Blink 182 and System of a Down. They're also fooling themselves by not including Linkin Park, who are so trendy to hate, but much better and more popular than many bands on that list. Lil' Jon & the Eastside Boys or the Neptunes/NERD would be interesting choices but I'm not sure they meet my criteria (Conor Oberst probably gets more help from others than Lil' Jon gets from the Eastside Boys, and does it really count if your best stuff is done outside the band?). Outside of that, most all that I can think of is so indie it's painful and would get less votes than even the most obligatory indie bands on that list (Blood Brothers? Please?).

first of all, that is awful.

that said, for me it came down to Wilco vs. Interpol & Radiohead vs. Flaming Lips. then i realized how much better three of those bands are better than interpol... so, i guess i learned something. woo-hoo.

-- poortheatre (gah242@nyu.edu ), January 12th, 2005.

how wow, me too.. though i'm not so inclined to promote radiohead..