1. Why did NME think that it was NOT OK to like G'n'R?/ Why did NME think that it WAS OK to like Nirvana?
2. Today, what band would be x in the equation "the x it's ok like"? (or has the music press given up on telling us who not to like?)(maybe this is a bad thing?)
― fritz, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Certainly its ok to like MBV, but the more generic shoegazers (mentioned above) have become a little derided in many quarters, just like the more generic purveyors of baggy (see the Farm). Possibly it is not as naff as hair-metal, though.
― gareth, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Saying some band is "The Chapterhouse it's OK to like" isn't quite so loaded, if you follow me.
hw's this: "The Streets is the So Solid Crew It's OK to Like"?
― dave q, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
hw's this: "The Streets is the So Solid Crew It's OK to Like"?"
I take your point. Most of those generic shoegazers are now defunct, so I cant think of a good name to insert. I dont agree with your streets-so solid crew example, though. Too many intrinsic differences - in music, attitude, and lyrical style. Streets embrace the grit, so solid aspire to the Gangsta glamour. Also, I dont think So Solid are naff enough to be a group its not "ok to like". They are shit, though.
― gritz, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
True, as a comparison it does mirror the one made with Nirvana and G'n'r. I dont agree with that comparison, either, though. I take your point, all the same.
― Sterling Clover, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
but that doesn't mean it needs further explanation.
― jess, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
btw the streets are incredibly NOT LIKE so solid crew soundwise etc so this is a bit of a non-starter surely
― mark s, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
The "g'n'r that it's ok to like" comment kind of acknowledges that everybody liked g'n'r anyway, doesn't it? just that they had a bit of the "hate myself for loving you" guilt about it.
the whole NME initial point is bit nuts once you think about it hard, but it sounds true. which makes it interesting.
anyway the idea of 2 bands being different versions of one another somehow appeals to me.
― A Nairn, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Dan Perry, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Curt, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Joe, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― keith, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― dave q, Thursday, 9 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Dave225, Thursday, 9 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― gareth, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
cannibal ox is the wu tang it's okay to like (in 2002.)
― jess, Saturday, 11 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
― Mark Delisle JR, Friday, 5 December 2003 01:53 (twenty-one years ago)
― Axl (Gear!), Friday, 5 December 2003 02:07 (twenty-one years ago)
― Francis Watlington (Francis Watlington), Friday, 5 December 2003 02:36 (twenty-one years ago)
― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Friday, 5 December 2003 12:29 (twenty-one years ago)
― Siegbran (eofor), Friday, 5 December 2003 14:22 (twenty-one years ago)
― N-Ri-K (Enrique), Friday, 5 December 2003 14:26 (twenty-one years ago)
― Cacaman Flores, Friday, 5 December 2003 22:23 (twenty-one years ago)
― Felcher (Felcher), Friday, 5 December 2003 22:46 (twenty-one years ago)
― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Friday, 5 December 2003 23:16 (twenty-one years ago)
― jones (actual), Friday, 5 December 2003 23:25 (twenty-one years ago)