Talk:Modest Mouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Alternative music (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Biography / Musicians (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (marked as Mid-importance).
WikiProject Rock music (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"A new album is widely expected to be released sometime in early 2006."[edit]

Source for this?

It is my understanding that "widely accepted" simply means "rumored". I would cut that line, at least until somebody can confirm the information.

Tongo Zitheroo Ketchill


How many people are there? It gives three names but it looks like four in the picture. Can someone clarify this please? HereToHelp (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Just from reading the article here it looks like they started as a 3-piece, then when the original drummer quit they expanded to 4-piece (adding a second guitarist in addition to the new drummer). Then the original drummer rejoined the band, replacing his replacement (confusing?: yes). Under the list of bandmembers it says "former member?" next to the second guitarist, so they either reverted back to their original 3-piece line-up or are still a 4-piece (and the question mark makes me think people don't know one way or another). This is just based on my reading the article here... Blogbourri 03:29, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Are you serious, read the article, they have four in the picture because it was taken before the two members left and were replaced by Jeremiah Green. Therefore, when it says former members it means that they left the band and the picture is older than the information.

That picture is a screenshot of their performance on Saturday Night Live, which is after Jeremiah Green returned. Dann Galluci was not replaced, he left fairly recently; his last show was late 2005. The Modest Mouse roster changes pretty frequently, and I think there were additional performers (members or not) offscreen in that picture. However the listing of band members near the end of the article is completely accurate as far as I'm aware.

i think its pretty dumb how this new guy is co-writing the songs. i doubt whatever he comes up with is gonna be as good as brocks stuff.

while I am also worried about modest mouse breaking down because of this-- you can't really call him a new guy. I mean, he played with the Smiths for ---'s sake

WHere did you get this info[edit]

ēēēāWhere did you get this information about a new CD? i think these guys are awexomeωæ Ąî

I heard it's supposed to come out this year from a reliable source... That is if Epic doesn't push it back to make a bunch of promotional deals... like last time.

The info on the origin of the band's name needs a citation. I've always heard that "modest mouse" was one of the phrases Brock had to repeat as a child as part of speech therapy for his lisp. 22:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

That information about the new album fails the Google test. I only got a handful of random forums buzzing around. Rolling Stone said Brock got decked out one night and broke his jaw. I assumed that's where his lisp came from. LockeShocke 12:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I recall reading somewhere (I forget where so ignore this as you see fit I suppose) an article in which someone who had known him since childhood described the lisp as one of his definitive qualities. However I think I could find an article in which he explains the origin of "modest mouse" (which is as the article says it is). Pance 23:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Concerning his lisp, if you watch the "Untitled Documentary" Isaac has a noticable lisp. This documentary was filmed in 1997, several years before his jaw was broken. --Arnesh 13:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

New Picture[edit]

We need a better picture. try the one on their myspace

Concerning the term "indie"[edit]

I don't have much of a problem with it, but seeing as how they're on Sony, a major record label, is the term "indie" really all that fitting for Modest Mouse?

It's appropriate. Indie rock is more of a musical style than an indication that a band is independent. Rhobite 03:07, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, "Indie Rock" is just going to cause disputes about the definition. I think we should use alternative. We don't want a revert war.

Indie rock has been used as a genre term for about twenty years, so it's valid to use. The concept of "indie" is covered at Indie (music). So there shouldn't be any confusion. I mean, does signing to a major label automatically mean your genre changes? I would beg to differ. WesleyDodds 00:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe if you signed to something like Murder, Inc. Indie Rock could also be consider Post-Alternative? Hm.

Listening to this band for the first time, it sounds like it fits neatly into the post-rock category to me. Compare to Mogwai, for example. Icemuon 18:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Obviously the above entry is a joke, as they're certainly not anything remotely close to post-rock. A select few songs are fairly long and more instrumental in nature, but again, the stylistic similarities to a band like Mogwai, Talk Talk, Slint, Godspeed You Black Emperor etc. are extremely slim.

Changing record labels does not change a band's genre of music. Indie as a genre is terrible to begin with. Not one "Indie" band sounds like the other. Influences range from electronica to Joy Division to the Rolling Stones to Pop. Interpol is an ALTERNATIVE band. Joy Division is an ALTERNATIVE band. Modest Mouse? ALTERNATIVE. Sunny Day REal Estate is an ALTERNATIVE band. Sonic Youth is an ALTERNATIVE band. Pixies = ALTERNATIVE. Alternative stems from punk rock. It's smarter; more experimental. Independent Rock? No. Just no. Independent Rock refers to the record label NOT THE SOUND. You don't sound independent you are indepedent. Modest Mouse is (clearly) an Alternative rock band. Let us please leave it at that because it makes so much more sense. - Aaron

Virtually all of the points you make concerning the limitations of the genre "indie" can be made similarly for the term "alternative". It is clear that there HAS been a music genre INDIE for years now, whether or not that is a good label to use is debatable, but it is what it is. 07:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)Cubbie
What Aaron is right in pointing out is that, originally, the term indie referred to an independent label. It's since been thrown around so much that it is almost an identifiable sound. But the culture that Indie represents is one of rebellion against the Big 5. Because Modest Mouse, currently, is signed to one of those labels, I think it's appropriate instead to call them technically alternative -- "with an indie sound." That's the most appropriate IMHO. LockeShocke 12:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I would argue that Modest Mouse is indeed and indie band. They got their start and made their impact with critics while signed to independent labels. I'm averse to using the world indie to describe a genre, but it's a descriptor (however clunky) that people seem to understand, at least presently. What's more, "alternative" as a descriptor has lost almost all significance. Jedidiah 17:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  • LISTEN! On theire myspace page, they list themselves as alternative/indie/rock. We should go by what the band themself says. Nuff said. Arnesh 01:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Wait, what? Just because a band labels themselves as something doesnt mean its actually so. I can make a rap group and label myself Country Music if I wanted to this doesn't make it so. 22:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, as soon as i started listening to Modest Mouse, i immediatley thought that "This is a Long Drive..." album would be their only album. But i have grown attached to their particularly random and intrueging music. i thought it was odd that they were considered as Alternitive. "Alternative" music (to me) is a (well, not a modest mouse genre) but i also dont think that it is really all that important. There are a lot of people that are on either side of the discussion, but you dont see Modest Mouse disputing over the argument. And if they dont care, Why should we? [Completely expressed as an opinion.] —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

As was mentioned earlier by Wesley Dods, the issue of Indie being a genre, now separate from from the means of production, is covered in the Indie rock page. The term refers not only to being signed to an independent label, but also to having a sound, style, or aesthetic that was first associated with such bands, regardless of current label. As Modest Mouse has more in common stylistically, if not economically, with indie music than alternative music, it is entirely correct to refer to them as "indie". This is especially important as people not familiar with the band, looking them up on Wikipedia, are likely wanting to know the genre insofar as they want to know what the band *sounds* like, rather than how band operates economically. Similarly, it would be inappropriate to classify a jazz band as "indie" on their Wikipedia page, even if the jazz band is signed to an independent label. In this way, it is more accurate and appropriate to describe Modest Mouse as indie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:08, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

First of all, that post by Wesley is from over three years ago. Secondly, I agree that it is not inaccurate to state that Modest Mouse is an indie rock band. However, that is too specific for the opening sentence, as they are also more than just indie rock (a subset of alternative rock). The term indie rock has it's rightful place in the infobox, so it isn't absent, but it does not belong as the primary descriptor for the band in the lead sentence. —Akrabbimtalk 22:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

What does the age of Wesley's post have to do with anything? And while indie rock may have its stylistic origins in alternative rock, it has since become a separate genre rather than a "subset" of alternative rock. Currently, many bands would be rightfully classified as indie, but not as alternative, although some may overlap. The term indie rock is hardly esoteric or needlessly specific to anyone at all familiar with contemporary music, and for the reasons I stated in my previous post, it more accurately describes Modest Mouse than alternative rock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

My point on the date of Wesley's post was that consensus has probably changed since then, but I suppose that this reasoning doesn't really apply here. Sorry about that. But anyway, even though "indie rock" is distinct from "alternative rock", it is still considered a subgenre (see Alternative rock). Considering the term is not inapplicable to Modest Mouse (see AMG), it is more accurate to label them initially as "alternative rock", and then specify more as the article goes on (as it is, the lead paragraph needs a little more on the influence they had pre-Epic). —Akrabbimtalk 01:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, despite its origins, claiming indie rock to *currently* be a subgenre of alternative seems both inaccurate and counter-intuitive, and I think the alternative page needs some serious revisions accordingly. As for AMG, I'm not familiar with that website, but it seems a bit unreliable as it also describes Modest Mouse as "emo", "lo-fi", and "noise pop". The [Modest Mouse page], which operates similar to a wiki for music enthusiasts, describes Modest Mouse as Indie rock in their lead sentence. Furthermore, the Wikipedia indie rock page fairly clearly classifies indie rock as it's own unique genre, not merely part of alternative rock, and traces some of its origins back independent of alternative rock, and arguably predating it. I think its reasonable to treat the indie rock page as a higher authority on indie rock than the alternative rock page, if we are going to compare Wikipedia pages to each other.

However, supposing that you still remain convinced that indie rock is, essentially, alternative rock, I still don't understand your reasoning why it is preferable to label them as alternative rock. Anyone familiar with the term alternative rock will also be familiar with the term indie rock, and vice versa. There is no advantage of that sort. And, subgenre or not, the term indie rock is more specific and more informative. If alternative rock can mean a whole host of different things, from grunge to britpop, as the alternative rock page claims, then it would seem more prudent to label Modest Mouse as indie rock. The term is more accurate and more descriptive of the style and sound of Modest Mouse than the term alternative rock; and conveying to someone unfamiliar with a band what the band sounds like is the purpose of stating the genre.

Lastly, I checked some other paradigmatic indie bands off the top of my head to see how they have been labeled, and they all use indie rock as the primary descriptor in the lead sentence. See Neutral Milk Hotel, Arcade Fire, Ambulance LTD, Built to Spill, Ugly Casanova, Death Cab for Cutie, and The Shins. Apart from being very stylistically similar to Modest Mouse, several of the bands also have made the jump from independent to major record labels, yet still retain the genre description "indie rock". Wikipedia appears to already have a standard of sorts for labeling indie rock bands as "indie rock bands", rather than as alternative rock. I see no reason why the Modest Mouse page ought to be an exception. (talk) 05:15, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I suppose what I am trying to say is that Modest Mouse is (at least a little) more than strictly indie rock, and it would be unfair to limit their description in the first sentence. But I think you have convinced me that it really is the most accurate term in this case. In other cases, where a band is not so clearly defined by their style and perhaps span multiple subgenres, it is better to start with broad like "rock" or "alternative rock" and move down, but I realize now that Modest Mouse is unambiguously smack dab in the middle of indie rock. —Akrabbimtalk 12:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


Why is there no mention of the incident where Isaac Brock, the singer of the band was accused of rape? -Lusy

  • ^^ fixed your isaac brock link, it went to the wrong person. --jp

Critical/commercial success[edit]

  • Not once in this article is there a single mention of critical success. Considering that "The Lonesome Crowded West" and "The Moon and Antarctica" are considered by many critics and tastemakers to be amongst the defining albums of their time, I find this lacking. Also, considering that "Good News..." has sold well over a million copies now, I think it's time that is noted.—Preceding unsigned comment added by SeanJohnston (talkcontribs)
  • Yeah well, considering that there are plenty of people who think Modest Mouse are repetitive, banal, and mind-numbingly idiotic, it's good that this article fits okay in NPOV, huh?—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)
  • Please sign your comments. Well-cited quotes mentioning that Modest Mouse has long been critically acclaimed and that their last album sold well is in no way a contradiction of NPOV.--Hraefen 15:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Album done June 26?[edit]

Where, exactly did this information come from?

"As of June 26, 2006, the band has finished its recording in Oxford, MS at Sweet Tea (Dennis Herring) and has returned to Portland, OR to finish overdubs and mixing of the latest album. Johnny Marr is a confirmed member of the band, co-writing songs for the new album with Isaac Brock."-- 06:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Name Conceived Differently?[edit]

I know that it's a common rumor that the name of the band came from the Russian composer Modest Moussorgsky. Can somebody see a relevant place where we can include this information or whether we should include it at all?

Geoff 06:32, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I heard yet another version of this story; Modest Mouse was a phrase that Isaac Brock had to repeat as an exercise for speech therapy to help correct his lisp.

Erm, the name came from a book Isaac read. He even said so in interviews. - Oatis

Isaac Brock has given multiple explanations as to the origin of the name. Perhaps that should be noted.

FINALLY, I found a source that says that the origin of the band's name is from The Mark On The Wall. Its here. Also, on the front page of what is now probably Modest Mouse's main fansite, it says the quote from the Mark on The Wall. So I guess I'll add that to the citation on the Modest Mouse page too.[1][2] Arnesh 01:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

well i found a better source, i think. the journalist Alan Goldsher ( wrote an autobiography of modest mouse, although i still can't find an actual interview with brock which would be best. about two thirds through this audio exert ( the name of the band is discussed (talk) 21:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

"Most Music Fans"[edit]

I removed the following lead in to the sentence describing the reaction to The Moon and Antarctica: "Despite lacklustre support from most music fans..."

There is no way to prove this and it's irrelevant as far as I can tell.

Jedidiah 17:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The new single[edit]

It's available.

Please don't add links to videos. That's frowned upon on talk pages. And remember to SIGN your posts too. Doc Strange 12:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Modest Mouse documentary[edit]

There is no evidence that this film is knowingly infringing copyright, and reason to suspect that it is not. It was uploaded to both You Tube and Google video, and linked by a legitimate documentary film site: [3]. The You Tube uploader credited the director both in the description and at the end of the film. Uploader also stated that the film will never be released (it's not commercial length for a doc, in either tv--50-60 min--or theatrical release--70 min plus). Nor is it a commerical film--it's superindie. The director died young of cancer (b. 1976-d. 2002). It looks like his friends or his family released the film after his death. It's been up, all over the internet, for a while now. In the absence of a complaint from 1) an inheritor of the copyright 2) Modest Mouse, stating that any music wasn't licensed, there's no reason this link shouldn't stay.-Cindery 19:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I've replaced the YT link with a better one. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Alternative Rock? Uh... I think not.


Why do the names listed in the picture caption not match the ones listed in the members sections of the infobox? - Zepheus <ゼィフィアス> 21:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

More members?[edit]

On their myspace there's six people in the band photo, there's only four listed in the core members section. I'm not a huge fan, so those of you who might know who those other two are can update the page. Thedeadreligionfx 03:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I just looked and the picture needs to be updated, and the core members needs to be updated. The picture in the corner has everyone except now it's Johnny Marr instead of Dann Gallucci, and I think Joe Plummer should be considered a core member if he's in the band photo, but I'll wait to edit it until someone replies.Thedeadreligionfx 03:21, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Just because those other members are in a promo photo doesn't mean they are main members. Modest Mouse has tons of friends/associates who help with extra instrumentation and vocals on their albums and sometimes help tour with them. These people can be considered "other members", because they are not regualr, long lasting, song-writing, etc. members of the band. Isaac Brock did say that Marr is a "full-blown member of the band" so it would probably be safe to say hes a core member. It's not "Marr instead of Dann Gallucci." Marr is not "replacing Dann. And Dann was not even a regular member anyways. He helped with some extra guitars, keyboards, etc. Either way, if you know Modest Mouse, you should probably know this. Arnesh 09:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
*One vote to edit the picture... anyone else? --Travisthurston 07:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean when you say "edit the picture"? Arnesh 23:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


Someone recently added lo-fi to their genre. I don't think this really constitutes there genre. Yeah, I guess they have the crappy sounding recordings on albums like Sad Sappy Sucker, but that is because those were actually random, crappy, early recordings. I think we can all agree that they have not had a "lo-fi" sound since their very early recordings, when they were much more punky/garage bandish. The band has of coure evolved as well from their punk/garage roots.In their early years they could probably be classified as punk rock or alternative punk or something like that. Obviously, singles like Float On and Dashboard are not at all "lo-fi". I'm going to remove lo-fi from their genre, because, at least currently, they are not lo-fi, but if someone thinks different, give a reason why you think they can be considered lo-fi on this talk page. Arnesh 23:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't lo-fi also count as not using pro tools and editing a record in post. Up until Moon & Antarctica, they didn't do hardly a thing other than double track Isaac's voice. --Rubiksphere 08:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Tom Peloso is not a core member.[edit]

Tom Peloso has only worked with the band with extra instrumentation on Good News. He is not one of the main members. The truly "core" members are Brock, Green, and Judy. They founded the band and came from the ground up. I guess Marr could be considered a core member, because he helped with songwriting on We Were Dead. If doing some extra instrumentation on one album makes you a core meber, you might as well add ALL of those "other members" to the core mebers section and say that Modest Mouse's core is comprised of 13 people. The definition of core meber is pretty much someone the band could not be without. (Even though Jeremiah Green left the band due to a mental breakdown during recording of Good News, but he is still core member) Peloso is just another one of Modest Mouse's "associates". Also, I'm once again removing lo-fi from their genre...See my above post about that. Arnesh 09:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I guess he is... Modest Mouse's myspace page says he and joe plummer are main members so whatever. Arnesh 00:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
  • The credits for the new album say "Modest Mouse is Isaac Brock, Jeremiah Green, Eric Judy, Johnny Marr, Tom Peloso & Joe Plummer." So they're officially a six-piece now.

I have just written a review for the latest album and it came with a press release from the record label which claims that Modest Mouse in fact have 6 members, the six that wikipedia currently lists. So it should stay. Robmac.


I feel the line, "In 2003, drummer Jeremiah Green quit the band due to a mental breakdown; the official word was that he was quitting to work with his side project, Vells," should cite its source. Fuch 17:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


Actually, they're not at all, so..I don't know why that genre was put there. I removed it. Oreo

Here's the thing with MM and emo. All Music Guide calls them emo. From what i remember, they list the band with second gen emo bands like At the Drive-In (which also are not emo by the definition created by the third and fourth gen emo bands), but they've also grown out of the genre well before Good News Doc Strange (talk) 17:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

modest mouse is most def. not emo —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

i never thought people could get so hung up on the genre of the band - what does it matter? everyones going to be able to cite a hundred bands commonly called 'indie' and therefore claim MM are therefore this, or another hundred bands that sound loosely similar that go under the heading 'emo' - just stick with facts like how many band members, instruments, and the bands own opinion of the kind of music they create —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Genres do fulfill a role for those who may not know much about a group, general readers but also journalists, deejays and others who cite Wikipedia. In a scholarly sense, then, getting it right is important. Devoted fans, of course, can really get up in arms about the issue; hence the "hang up" over accuracy. As for "facts," genres can be debatable not they're not subjective, but all we can do is report what "authoritative" sources tell us and try to sort out any conflicts. Oh, and emo MM ain't, so I don't know what to say about AllMusic, usually a decent source. One possibility would be to contact them for either clarification or revision. Allreet (talk) 00:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I second the removing of emo. Also, none of the wiki pages for any of their records state emo as a genre. Narcolepticpathos (talk) 20:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Pickin' On[edit]

I just made the Pickin' On Modest Mouse album, a bluegrass tribute. Should revisions be made to the discography to include a tribute album? It should be linked in somehow. The article regarding the Metallica Discography includes their tribute albums. And if anyone has anything to contribute to the above stated article, it would be greatly appreaciated FerventDove 18:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Isaac Brock Self-Mutilation and Album Leak[edit]

Two entries were removed on the grounds of unencyclopedic, but I added them again for these reasons: The Sioux Falls event was well documented (the Pitchfork article being the only one which can be sourced here, but two videos of a bloodied Brock, and blog entries, again, can not be sourced here). The bit about the album leak should stay, if for nothing else, to give context to MGM v. Grokster case. It's not sourced, per se, but it's been on the We Were Dead Before the Ship Even Sank article since it happened. If some can definitively say this is libelous (regarding Sioux Falls) or any other stated reason, edits should be made accordingly, and to the Isaac Brock entry (which contains same content) or the We Were Dead... article. FerventDove 19:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the entries. If it's not sourced it is not sourced, there isn't much per se to be had there. As to his injury and the Pitchfork article (which I saw at the time), I still fail to see what these edits have to do with Modest Mouse as an encyclopedic entry. News events don't warrant entries, IMO. Teke 04:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Sun Kil Moon's Tiny Cities[edit]

I think Sun Kil Moon's Tiny_Cities deserves to be somehow mentioned in the Modest Mouse article. It's not actual MM discography but is notable and surely of interest to readers. I'm not sure how this information could be integrated into the article properly but it seems worth exploring. Not to mention, the lyrics and the title to "Ocean Breaths Salty" are a cover from Tiny Cities. Johntroy 13:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Modest Mouse is MODEST MOUSE not "just" Isaac Brock[edit]

I have a problem of the following quote in the 2nd paragraph, in regards to either its NPOV or its verifiablility. "Ultimately, Modest Mouse is singularly Isaac Brock who is the main creative force behind the band's unique sound and style."

In keeping with an opinionated point of view, I find that Modest Mouse is a result of not one member creating its sound, but all of its members (at any time period) being so in tune with each other that changes in the line up results in dramatic changes in the sound. If it was only Brock creating the sound then member changes would have no effect on the overall "sound" of the music.

Also I'd like to point out that on the new album, (buy it and read the credits), it is written: "Lyrics by Isaac Brock", followed on the next two lines by the copyrights and their attributes. Then on a single, separated line: "Modest Mouse is Isaac Brock, Jeremiah Green, Eric Judy, Johnny Marr, Tom Peloso, Joe Plummer"

Brock is credited specifically for the lyrics, not the music itself.

Based on this and other various impressions, I find it hardly possible that any one member, including Isaac Brock himself, would claim that "Modest Mouse is singularly Isaac Brock" or that [He] "is the main creative force behind the band's unique sound and style"

Not only is this statement, in my book, a biased opinion, but a uneducated one as well, unless the statement can be supported with quotes coming from the band stating it to actually be the case.

The statement WOULD apply if it were made in such a case as Josh Homme of "Queens of the Stone Age". Which leads me to point out a quote from the Wikipedia article of Josh Homme, (, and how such a statement is an example of how I think it could be worded better, in a factual manner:

"Homme is the founder and only continuous member of rock band Queens of the Stone Age (QOTSA), for which he sings and plays guitar."

Replace "Modest Mouse" with "Queens of the Stone Age" and "Issac Brock" with "Josh Homme" with in the statement I am disputing, and then move the entire statement over to Hommes' article and I would no longer have anything to dispute. The sentence would look like this: "Ultimately, Queens of the Stone Age is singularly Josh Homme who is the main creative force behind the band's unique sound and style."

The rest of Modest Mouse deserves credit too...

Stormlilly 08:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)Stormlilly

I agree, I think it is further proof of the "band" by adding Johnny Marr and the influence that Ugly Casanova collaborative session had. I removed the paragraph. You could have! Teke 05:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

So from what your saying up there, Nirvana was just Kurt Cobain because he wrote all the music, and from 1972-1983, Pink Floyd was just Roger Waters. That's some crazy thinking Doc Strange 12:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

i agree the credit should b spread but isaac is the brains behind the band —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


Who keeps adding "Dashboard" as a Top 40 Hit in the US? According to the Billboard Hot 100 (as of 4/4/07) the single is at #59. Not #20 as claimed in this article. I replaced it with the accurate chart peak. If the person who is doing this is using an alternate chart (say Radio & Records), they should know that US chart peaks are for the Billboard Hot 100 only and not the Billboard Hot Airplay, Pop 100 or other alternate chart. Also Modern Rock chart peaks should be included written as "#1 US Modern Rock" (like "Float On"), not simly #1 US. Doc Strange 12:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

John Wickhart[edit]

I'm confused whether Eric Judy was in the band since the beginning or not. Their early history is very hazy. In this interview Eric is said to be in the band since it's beginnings, but Sad Sappy Sucker credits John Wickhart, and Calvin Johnson (who produced Sad Sappy Sucker and Lonesome Crowded West) says in the Untitled Documentary that (out of memory I'm saying this, correct me if I'm wrong) that it's his third session with Modest Mouse, and first one with Eric (and second one with Jeremiah). But recent articles insist Eric was in the band before Jeremiah even was. Just wondering--liam 23:49, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

We need to put something about the live shows.[edit]

About how Issac Brock has been known to lie down for entire shows and has cut himself numerous times on stage during a concert.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 05:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

This is covered at his page, I don't really think we need a seperate section here about it... AllynJ 10:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Someone straighten this out[edit]

Why are "3rd Planet" and "Gravity Rides Everything" named as singles from The Moon and Antarctica in the text, but the infobox for singles doesn't include them or anything from that album? 06:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

u can buy the one song hence single —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Indie Rock?[edit]

There's no way they can be indie rock, as they are signed to a major label - ZEROpumpkins (talk) 23:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Currently, they are more of an alternative noise rock band, but their previous material is all considered indie rock. —Vanishdoom (talk) 04:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Indie is how nearly all bands start out, but it's become a genre that also describes a sound as well as an approach. As long as MM and writers refer to the group as such - and other writers don't dispute it - it's not our job to split hairs. But being signed to a major label after making it as an indie doesn't disqualify a group from the "club," unless they also abandon other ideals associated with the term and reliable sources make note of this. Allreet (talk) 00:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

They are totally indie rock. I have multiple times added "noise pop" was a genre, but someone keeps undoing it. Tezkag72 (talk) 03:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Two Drummers?[edit]

Whats going on here? the video for we've got everything has two dudes on the skins and I was just wondering what the deal was with these guys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not unusual for bands to have two drummers. For most of their career, the Grateful Dead had two drummers at once, and ...And You Will Know Us By the Trail of Dead currently have two drummers. In fact, the metal band Slipknot actually have three drummers. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 18:06, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Johnny Marr Not A Past Member[edit]

Johnny Marr is a current member. He is not joining the band on their current tour but there is nothing that has led us to believe that he has left the band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, he's working with The Cribs, a British band he recently joined, on their next album. He is remaining in Modest Mouse but is just sitting out this tour. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 18:07, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Band name--Virginia Woolf?[edit]

I see that this article claims that the band name comes from Virginia Woolf, and then simply links to a passage of hers with "modest mouse" in it. Does that prove anything? I bet I could find some literature that includes the phrase "the pixies." I've read a few articles that have said that "Modest Mouse" comes from someone commenting on how Isaac Brock used to sing--like a "modest mouse," because it sounded so timid. Ha, how different it is today! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I tracked down a ref for the name origin and added it. Bon appetit! - Richfife (talk) 04:36, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Tube-Fruit, All Smiles and Chocolate[edit]

Not sure it qualifies as an album. More like a recorded noodling session. But, at 77 minutes and 25 tracks, it's not an EP either. New section for it? - Richfife (talk) 02:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Origin of Name[edit]

Everyone keeps telling me that Modest Mouse was named after Modest Mussorgsky. Is this true? If so, it should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Apparently not. See the Virginia Woolf references in the article. - Richfife (talk) 04:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC)


With many bands/musicians, there is a style section that discusses the bands style. It would be helpful to have on in here as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:33, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


I am just wondering why there is a section for recent work. Wasnt We were dead before the ship sank also mainstream? I mean it did get gold certification within a year or 2 and was number one on a chart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happymeal33 (talkcontribs) 23:07, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I have renamed the section "Initial mainstream success" from just "Mainstream success" to clarify. —Akrabbimtalk

Two new songs[edit]

I added infor about the songs they played during their headline at sasquatch plus a link. If you think the link isnt strong enough, then I will get antoher one. Happymeal33 (talk) 19:38, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Portland, Oregon[edit]

Why is it constantly edited out that Modest Mouse resides in Portland? They have for several years. I have added it multiple times in the last few years that Modest Mouse lives in Portland, and there are verifiable sources. Is there a content-related reason for taking it out? It is an interesting and relevant fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:09, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Album missing in Discography from 2001[edit]

In the Discography part there is one Album missing; "Everywhere and His Nasty Parlour Tricks".

The Album itself is already on wikipedia: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


How come the first section is titled "formation" when it doesn't talk about any part of it?Zdawg1029 (talk) 04:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Strangers to Ourselves[edit]

References to and information about the (currently upcoming) album Strangers to Ourselves should be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjklassen (talkcontribs) 22:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)