Michael Azerrad s Book for the 90s

52
Possum Hiss wrote:Fugazi(They shouldn't have been in the original, considering they already had Minor Threat in it and the majority of Fugazi's work came in the 90s)


Michael Azerrad wrote:Although Fugazi's legend grew even larger in the Nineties, Brendand Canty feels the band's early days tell its truest story. "People might look back at us and think we're this icon," he says, "but at the time there was just a couple of hundred people coming to the shows and it wasn't huge and nothing had potential. It was just inportant to do it. And the fact that we all wanted to go on the road and work as hard as possible, and that we were able to, is in itself its own success story. It doesn't necessarily have to be about getting anywhere, but about getting through the process of fulfilling your own possibilities."


that's why they were in there for the 80's

marsupialized wrote:a whole Tortoise chapter called 'The band that ruined Chicago forever'


Tortoise
if i got lasik surgery on one eye, i could wear a monacle.

Michael Azerrad s Book for the 90s

55
One of the things I really liked about his book was that he was able to talk about a few different bands from around the country that did not just follow the wave but started their own path (put out their own and their friends records, booked shows in places these type of shows had not happened in yet, etc). These to me were not just randomly picked great bands, they were bands that help define what we now consider the way to do things.

SO, in answer to the question, I would choose bands from the 90's that continued in that vein but since they were more of a second wave (yeah, arguably the fourth wave but you know what I mean) their importance is not defined by their innovation as the first book's bands were, but for their full tilt investment in addition to being great bands. I would start with Fugazi (yes, was in the first book) and Dischord, continue to Superchunck and Merge, Tsunami and Simple Machines, Unrest and Teenbeat, recap Beat Happening and K Records, include Drag City and the revolution of sorts they and their bands brought forth (Royal Trux, Pavement, Palace, Smog, etc), continue on from more Touch & Go and Matador as they both helped define the 90's, look at the Louisville contingent (Slint, King Kong, Bastro, Squirrel Bait, etc), Unwound would be good, maybe even the Monomen and that whole Bellingham Estrus thing.... I feel like I am forgetting a few more naturals... I guess more on Sub-pop, maybe more labels...
Last edited by Mayfair_Archive on Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Michael Azerrad s Book for the 90s

59
Mayfair wrote:One of the things I really liked about his book was that he was able to talk about a few different bands from around the country that did not just follow the wave but started their own path (put out their own and their friends records, booked shows in places these type of shows had not happened in yet, etc). These to me were not just randomly picked great bands, they were bands that help define what we know consider the way to do things.

SO, in answer to the question, I would choose bands from the 90's that continued in that vein but since they were more of a second wave (yeah, arguably the fourth wave but you know what I mean) their importance is not defined by their innovation as the first book's bands were, but for their full tilt investment in addition to being great bands. I would start with Fugazi (yes, was in the first book) and Dischord, continue to Superchunck and Merge, Tsunami and Simple Machines, Unrest and Teenbeat, recap Beat Happening and K Records, include Drag City and the revolution of sorts they and their bands brought forth (Royal Trux, Pavement, Palace, Smog, etc), continue on from more Touch & Go and Matador as they both helped define the 90's, look at the Louisville contingent (Slint, King Kong, Bastro, Squirrel Bait, etc), Unwound would be good, maybe even the Monomen and that whole Bellingham Estrus thing.... I feel like I am forgetting a few more naturals... I guess more on Sub-pop, maybe more labels...


Great thoughts here: organizing a 90s book around the canon of independent labels would foreground the shift from, say, Bob Mould's recollection of the relative lack of non-corporate infrastructure in the 80s (and the predominance of SST) to the incorporation and success of several imprints.

This would leave Nomeansno out of the pack though, so they'd have to get a special Wrong Chapter (Because without a doubt Nomeansno deserve recognition as one of the greatest, the least compromising, and the least hip working bands of the 90s. I cannot wait to see them once more in November).

Someone write this book!

Michael Azerrad s Book for the 90s

60
..and to continue that thought, there were more pieces of the infrastructure coming together in the 90's like indie booking.... from the infamous Michele V (Nirvana, early Sub-pop bands, Flaming Lips), to independent promoters in small towns like John Henderson, Manny in Pittsburg, to Billions and Flower agencies who are both still heading the genre, etc, etc. Maybe this would not be as sexy a chapter as ones about bands we love but would add to the idea of the building of the avenues we now certainly take for granted.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests