Jump to content

Talk:Grunge/Archive 2: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Leyasu (talk | contribs)
Line 364: Line 364:
<p>
<p>
: No, this is about the complaint that the other user made, who you have proclaimed 15 simply because they disagree with you. This is also about your Meglomanical POV, and your violation of Wikipedia Policys concerning Ownership of Articles. If the article was so perfect, people wouldnt make complaints about it. [[User:Leyasu|Leyasu]] 06:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
: No, this is about the complaint that the other user made, who you have proclaimed 15 simply because they disagree with you. This is also about your Meglomanical POV, and your violation of Wikipedia Policys concerning Ownership of Articles. If the article was so perfect, people wouldnt make complaints about it. [[User:Leyasu|Leyasu]] 06:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

::He proclaimed him 15 because he said he was born in 1990, therefore he would be aproxmiately 15 years of age. And just because a complaint is made doesn't make it valid.

Revision as of 10:27, 21 December 2005

Template:Featured article is only for Wikipedia:Featured articles. Template:Mainpage date

WikiProject iconMusic/Music genres task force NA‑class
WikiProject iconGrunge/Archive 2 is within the scope of the Music genres task force of the Music project, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardize music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the task force guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good article status.
NAThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Older content of this page has been moved to Talk:Grunge music/Archive1.



Lyrical content

I was thinking of adding something about the lyrical content, but thought it would be better to run it by youse for comment. I'm not really sure how to encapsulate some of this stuff -

  • Surreal/stream of consciousness lyrics are common.
  • Songs about sex and love do occur, but often in a more offbeat way than cockrock or pop music.
  • Themes often try to be unusual.
  • Drugs are occasionally mentioned.
  • Political content does occur, but is often incidental/not so overt.
  • Songs about fantasy/science fiction are avoided like the plague.
  • Melancholy themes are often chosen, as are mental states.

What could be added/taken away do you think? --MacRusgail 14:51, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Those sound like good ideas and I wouldn't mind more info on what the songs are like, but you'll need to be more detailed than what you mentioned. For instance, specific examples of songs would help to point out exactly what you mean by each of those points. Run some by me and I'll let you know what I think. -- LGagnon 17:40, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll have to look up a few of the lyrics... examples off hand, from individual bands:
1) stream of consciousness - lots of this in Nirvana's music, probably another influence from the Pixies, e.g. "the water is so yellow, I'm a healthy student", and Something in the Way is a good example of this, 2) drugs galore in Alice in Chains' music, 3) melancholy e.g. "The Day I tried to live" by Soundgarden, and Alice in Chains again, 4) fantasy/SF - I can't think of any grunge examples - maybe there is one, but they were two a penny in trad. metal. 5) political themes, very hard to pin down but I suppose this is of passing interest [1] - except not completely relevant. Pearl Jam's Bushleaguer counts maybe. --MacRusgail 14:23, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
Well, again, grunge or post-grunge depending on how you view them, but Foo Fighters are heavy into Science Fiction, which the album art for their first two albums reflect. The song "Floaty" was supposed to be about aliens coming down to earth. Again, I want to throw in here, three LA bands, Tool, Rage Against the Machine and L7 had very political lyrics in the grunge era (RATM through out), but for Tool, Hush and Opiate in particular. L7 (who was on the Sub Pop label), thier biggest song was "Pretend that We're Dead", which was very political, and also "American Society" and "Wargasm" are very overt. Nirvana had one overtly politcal song "Downer", but songs like "Smells Like teen Spirit", for example, were about a youth revolution (and I do mean an actual violent revolution, not figurative as many have claimed). The oringal idea of the Teen Spirit video were going to include more violent imagery witht he janitor being a militant handing out rifles to the kids. Soundgarden's "Rusty Cage" was a political song but more subtle, and "Fourth of July" could be seen as social comentary on America, although with very poetic and metaphorical lyrics. Pearl Jam's "Why Go" and Nirvana's "Been a Son" were very feminist in nature. Cobain and Vedder were very out spoken on various issues, particualrly feminism and being pro-choice. Cobain was also against homophobia as shown in the liner notes in Incesticide's original release. The Nirvana video "In Bloom" the band dressed in drag and Krist and Kurt kissed on SNL reportedly to "piss homophobes off". Pearl Jam also did fund raising for Nader and later Kerry. Lastly, Temple of the Dog's (members of Pearl Jam and Soundgarden) song "Hunger Strike" is overtly political. Alice in Chian's "Man in the Box", uses the metaphor of veal, and how they are kept in a cage in which they can't move or stand and only know what they are fed from the outside world, as a discribtion of our place in society. The video takes place in a farm and has a mushroom cloud going off at the solo. Off course, I regard Rage's first album as grunge, maybe even the second, and every song is political.
What is also interesting is lyrics which take the point of view of disturbed individuals. Nirvana's "Polly" takes the point of view of a kidnapper and rapist. Thier song "Lithium" takes the point of view of a person going crazy and "Mr. Moustache" takes the position of a redneck bigot. Tool's "Prison Sex" takes the point of view of a child molester.
Also, lyrics are about disturbing subjects, like Pearl Jam's "Jeremy" which is about a neglected youth who shoots himself in front of his classmates. Nirvana's "Floyd the Barber" is about a town of murderers and rapists.
What might also been seen as political is the anti-organized religion stance by many bands of the era. Alice in Chains' "Get Born Again", Tool's "Opiate", Temple of the Dog's "Your Savior", Soundgarden's "Jesus Christ Pose", all attack religion. And Nirvana's song "Stay Away" nade the very interesting theological position that "God is gay".--128.59.143.41 17:10, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

There's potential here, but to keep it NPOV we'd really have to find critics, etc., who talk about this. That said, we might want to contrast (for example) the Screaming Trees' evocative lyrics to Pearl Jam's much more narrative lyrics. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:42, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. We should make sure we have some sources that can back this up. -- LGagnon 18:53, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
Pearl Jam's lyrics tend to be more narrative (not a band I'm much into, so I don't listen to them much! But those who are more familiar with them can help), but their most famous song Jeremy deals with a perhaps "unusual" theme (not weird, but unusual) for rock music perhaps - or at least deals with an everyday situation in an unusual way, that mainstream heavy metal bands wouldn't. I've been chewing this whole thing over, and there certainly are common threads, although it's very hard to pin them down. Grunge isn't ponderous like prog rock, but it does try to put some thought into its lyrics I reckon. --MacRusgail 14:23, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

This is all very tricky, though. On the whole, grunge was a music of disaffected youth, although its appeal went beyond that. Andrew Wood, Kurt Cobain, and Layne Staley were literally self-destructive; Mark Lanegan, when young, was probably almost equally so but happens to have survived. They all were the main lyricists of their respective bands. Many of their bandmates were a lot better balanced people. As for politics: Mark Arm of Mudhoney, very political. Krist Novaselic: probably not all that political in his Nirvana days, but certainly so now (he has seriously considered running for public office). Pearl Jam (the lot of them), too.

It would seem to me, though, that the themes most running through grunge lyrics are alienation, suffering, and resistance/survival and/or anger/vengeance. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:58, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

This is good stuff, JM. Although it is wrong to stereotype Grunge lyrics in any way, I think that there are certain recurring common themes. I would like to condense our ideas into something we can put in the article itself. All the best --MacRusgail 15:38, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

"independent-rooted"

"independent-rooted music genre" - what an odd phrase. What does it mean?

The genre became popular in the mainstream, but its roots were in the indie rock scene. -- LGagnon 00:54, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

I agree it's a very awkward phrase. Is that how genres with roots in indie rock are described among enthusiasts? Might a better, more "encyclopedic" phrase be used?→Encephalon | T | C 11:49:52, 2005-08-06 (UTC)

I'd prefer something like a "genre rooted in the Indy scene" - Indy makes some sense. --MacRusgail 16:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

The Label of “Grunge”

I played the Seattle original scene from 1990 to 2001. I can tell you for fact that “Grunge” WAS NOT A TERM SEATTLE BANDS LABLED THEMSELVES. In fact the more Seattle’s music was labeled “Grunge” the more bands ditch the heavy black work boots and flannel shirts and changed their music style. Read interviews and articles of most Seattle bands, get some old issues of the “Rocket” (Seattles music scene magazine back then) and you will understand that the Grunge label was put there by the commercial music industry. It was a label that most Seattle bands at the time despised…

Of course, every week we would see bands coming from all over the country trying to be in the middle of the “Music Hot Spot” of the time… Record companies were passing out contracts like it was going out of style…

The local bands changed almost immediately after this… More aggressive music became the norm in Seattle… (Some would call it “Angry”)

Just my insight of the Seattle “Grunge” scene — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grilledcheezy (talkcontribs) 17 Oct 2005 (UTC)

grunge as a fashion

I'm surprised to see that there is no mention of the controversy surrounding this perported music genre. Many people, including those in bands commonly considered "grunge", denied that the genre existed at all. (Now yr gonna make me remember who said it. huh?) It was never entirely clear what, apart from playing rock music in Seattle, qualified a band for the moniker. In fashion however, the style was clearly defined (think homeless lumberjack). In terms of music, when reviewers saw a flannel shirt, they called it grunge. This was never more obvious then when I first saw the Jeff Buckley video, in which he wore a flannel shirt and crooned in a high falsetto. Mtv was branding him a new grunge artist. I think it has far more to do with clothing than music. I'm not saying the article is pointless, but I feel it's a perspective worth addressing. Sadangel 15:01, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Just because there are fakes doesn't mean the genre doesn't exist. We already took that into consideration when we separated post-grunge from this article to show the difference between it and grunge. And whether or not some musician said the genre doesn't exist (and yes, if you want to mention it in the article, you do need to know who said it) doesn't change the fact that it is well established as existing. As for fashion, we have already explained in the article that it was nothing more than a superficial detail of how Seattlites just happened to dress. -- LGagnon 16:38, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
It was commonality of sound; plus who were their fans; plus many having played in bands together (e.g. Green River as progenitor to both Pearl Jam and Mudhoney), been fans of the same bands (especially of The Melvins), released on the same independent labels, even rehearsed in the same studio spaces. There was plenty else going on musically in Seattle at the time that no one anywhere mistook for grunge (Sky Cries Mary, Sir Mix-a-lot, The Posies, and the Presidents of the United States of America, to name some obvious examples) and plenty even that came out of the punk scene that no one locally mistook for grunge (The Fastbacks, 7 Year Bitch, The Gits who ought to have an article but I see that all we have is Mia Zapata). -- Jmabel | Talk 01:53, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
Agreed on that last comment. The Gits deserve their own article. -- LGagnon 23:58, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
I don't think the clothing side of it can be denied. Bear in mind that punk fashion evolved unconsciously too, and that rockers gained their leathers through their enthusiasm for motorbikes, not consciously. --MacRusgail 18:15, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Redd Kross

This band should be incorporated.

They are punk, not grunge. -- LGagnon 18:10, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
This is exactly the ambiguity I referred to in my previous post. What makes Readd Kross any less grunge than Nirvana? Where is the line between Punk and Grunge? Redd Kross was even part of the same scene. They just came a few years earlier. If the only distinctions are location and timeframe, I hardly think it an adequate basis on which to distinguish a genre of music. Frankly, I don't care enough to pursue the matter further. I think it would be worthwhile to present an alternate viewpoint about the term, but I'm not going to war over it. Sadangel 21:57, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
Same scene? California's scene is a bit far from Seattle (2 states over, but not close enough). They are generally not considered grunge, and you'd be hard pressed to find a source that calls them that, so they are not included. -- LGagnon 22:13, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Non-trivial Edits

Hi there. First, congrats to all contributors who shepherded this article to FA status (from the Talk page it looks like LGagnon in particular has done a lot of work here - kudos). It's richly deserved. I've just edited the article quite significantly. No factual changes, just copy-editing to tighten up the prose. I did quite a bit; I mean no disrespect to the editors of this article, I just thought I'd add a contribution. Feel free to critique. Much thanks. →Encephalon | T | C 17:15:19, 2005-08-06 (UTC)

Some of your edits were good, but unfortunately you changed some things significantly; for instance, the first citation makes no sense now because you deleted the line it referred to. I'm going to go through the article and change back a few things you altered too much. -- LGagnon 18:10, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
Done. -- LGagnon 18:21, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Redd Kross is frequently mentioned as a significant influence to the grunge scene.

Prove it. Give me some references. -- LGagnon 23:53, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
Ok, that's good. My problem was with the fact that someone wanted to "incorporate them" (whatever that meant) without explaining why we should add them. I just wanted to make sure they would be listed as an influence, not a grunge band (as too many bands have been wrongly given that title). -- LGagnon 13:13, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Here you go: Allmusic, Interview and Redd Kross

  • there are a lot of POV phrases in the article, ie. "Hüsker Dü are also believed by some to have been an influence" and "(Melvins are) considered grunge bands by some fans of the genre, although others classify them as hardcore punk bands." Are the those the only two choices I get for the Melvins? I wonder what they would think? Next time I see them I'll ask. Nice article, by the way. I appreciated the work you put into it. See you 'round! Hamster Sandwich 23:06, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
That isn't POV. The Melvins are considered to be either grunge or hardcore punk by just about everyone; we aren't going to throw in, for instance, disco just because someone thinks they should count as it. It's not POV, it's just the general consensus; if you could find citable proof to the contrary then you might have a point. -- LGagnon 23:53, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
      • Its just me, LGagnon. The Melvins have done so much music of different styles, its hard for me to pigeonhole them to a particular "style". I reserve the term "experimental". Thats exactly why they are influential. If they were doing the same stuff as everyone else, they wouldn't influence anybody. I'll admit they are my favorite band, so therefore, my own opinion is going to be extreme. Sorry for being so strident! :P see ya 'round! Hamster Sandwich 00:13, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
In a perfect world, all bands would play in a single genre. But they don't. That includes Grunge. I think one or two of Eels' songs are very close to grunge, but not their entire output.--MacRusgail 16:15, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
I'd rather call the Melvins sludge or stoner rock than grunge or hard core, not that i really care i like both stoner and grunge johan2501 13:56, 27 August 2005

Grunge Backlash

There's no mention of the backlash that grunge got, from proper Heavy Metal fans in the 90s, who thought it was ruining rock and roll. There was definatly a scene around, of bands that continued to play heavy metal music, who had hard core followings. Perhaps someone could find some reference to this, and add it.

Um... I think this is worth mentioning, but I would say that Grunge is a form of HM. I'd refer to trad. HM. Not just HM of course though but Punk. There was a punk backlash too. --MacRusgail 21:06, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
Grunge grew out of the punk scene and has much stronger roots in punk than in metal. It did incorporate metal elements, but that does not make it metal per say. As for the backlash, show some sources and we'll be able to consider it for inclusion. -- LGagnon 00:20, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
I think the punk backlash & revival should be mentioned too. Grunge was accused of selling out by them. Some influences on Grunge e.g. Led Zeppelin in the case of Nirvana, would have been more or less unacceptable to the first wave of punk. The very common long hair I suppose might come out of metal too. I consider Grunge to be a kind of crossover genre, like Rock n Roll originally was, and which ended up alienated both of its prime origins a little bit. --MacRusgail 01:10, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, the whole Neo-punk scene with bands like Pennywise, the Offspring, Rancid and so on, were all a big middle finger to grunge. Although, while some of those bands were kinda cool, they all were heavily imitating Bad relgion, which was kinda redundant, since Bad Religion puts out the same album every couple of years...
LGagnon: Re: punk v. metal, I mostly agree, except for Alice In Chains, whose background was mostly metal. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:33, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Blues as a stylistic influence

I think RnB, the old style, not the Destiny's Child type, is one of the most neglected areas of influence on Grunge. I'm not sure if all bands were influenced by it, but certainly I often thought the singing on Soundgarden and Stone Temple Pilots' records was sometimes noticeably blues influenced. Nirvana was less obviously influenced, but then again they covered a lot of Leadbelly's songs, notably "Where did you sleep last night?" --MacRusgail 09:39, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Yes, though I suspect they first got the song from Mark Lanegan (of the Screaming Trees), not directly from Leadbelly. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:28, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
    • Possibly, although I don't doubt they probably tracked down the original. Nirvana covered at least four Leadbelly songs. Mudhoney's My Brother the Cow also contains a couple of obviously blues influenced songs, including one with blues in the title.--MacRusgail 16:15, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I'll have to agree, the frequent use of power chords in grunge music shows that all to well, as power chords originated in blues. --User:Kerrysfrench

clumsy sentence

LGagnon has reverted my change:

'due to the fact that its popularization was in tandem with the rise of the generation's name.'

back to the ungrammatical and clumsy:

'due to its popularization being in tandem with the popularizing of the generation's name.'

If my edit produced the wrong meaning, will someone have another go at rewording this, please?

Tony 00:48, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

First of all, "due to the fact" is too long; it's much more concise the way I originally put it. Secondly, what is the "rise" of a name? That's way too ambiguous to be useful. -- LGagnon 01:30, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
I have reworded it to be something in between our two edits. It seems to sound better than either of the previous phrasings in my opinion. -- LGagnon 01:35, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Much better now. Tony 13:39, 24 August 2005 (UTC)



m dashes

I see that they're now surrounded by spaces; most major US and UK style manuals now recommend no spaces. It would be easier for non-specialist editors if a single character were used, rather than the html code. Tony 01:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Unfortunately, if we put the m-dash character in directly, editing in certain browsers clobbers it. But they shouldn't have spaces around them, according to the MoS. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:42, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

I thought that the browser problem had been solved. I see m dash characters used widely in Wikipedia. Tony 00:39, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Fad category

Is it fair to call grunge a fad? I think we should have discussed this first before adding that category. After all, grunge still has popularity to this day. Nirvana's box set didn't sell well on a wave of nostalgia alone, after all. I'm reverting the article for now; we can add the category back if there's a good argument for it given. -- LGagnon 19:30, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Doesn't seem to me like a useful category, but seems particularly inappropriate to this article, unless it is going to be applied to virtually every type of music that has seen commercial success without becoming a major lasting genre. And grunge has been pretty close to a lasting genre. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:08, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Important read for “Grunge” Fashion

Before the “Grunge” craze most musicians, like everywhere, were poor. Weather and local occupation like logging made thick flannel shirts and heavy black boot common, rugged and cheap… Second hand stores were filled with these types of clothing and it was practical for the weather in Seattle… During the grunge craze the second-hand stores couldn’t keep em in stock and national cloths outlets would sell pre-worn flannels for big dollars… At this time most Seattle bands decide to rebel against this obvious mass marketing of the “grunge” look and decided get rid of the work boots and flannels in Seattle… — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grilledcheezy (talkcontribs) 17 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Pretty much what we already say: "The "fashion" did not evolve out of a conscious attempt to create an appealing fashion, but due to the inexpensiveness of such clothes and the warmth that they provided for the cold climate of the region. The media, rather than focusing on the music, would give this fashion a heavy amount of exposure. In the early 1990s, the fashion industry marketed "grunge fashion" to a widespread audience, charging relatively high prices for clothing that they assumed to be popular in the grunge scene." -- Jmabel | Talk 07:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps a parrel to punk rock can be drawn here how the original punk bands worn torn clothing and saftey pins because of poverty and not for intended fashion. Then people like Malcolm McLaren used this look to sell clothes. In fact there are many parreles of the rise of a band like the Sex Pistols in the UK and Nirvana in the US. Totally accidental in nature and helped dethorne corporate and indulgent rock, in one case the hieght of the prog rock era coinsiding with arena rock and bands like Boston, Chicago, Fletwood Mac, the Eagles, rod stewrt, etc, and on the other hand hair metal.--SonOfUncleSam 08:16, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

A Couple of Points

Well it's definately true that punk had a huge influence on "Grunge" music. Important bands named were Hüsker Dü, Black Flag, the Melvins and the Pixies. But why is there absolutely no mention of Bad Brains? I don't know if you guys rembere the 1980s hardcore punk scene but they were huge! And this combining of metal and punk styles were definately on Bad Brain's albums, particularly on 1986's "I Against I" and 1989's "Quickness". I mean you listen to these ablums today and they are (just like the Pixies are) ahead of their time and very much are representative of what would become the 90s sound. Hell they even wore flannel on the cover! :P

While we are at it, if we are going to include bands like Stone Temple Pilots as Grunge, despite the fact they aren't from Seattle, then let's not forget band like Tool and Rage Against the Machine. Granted they never used the term grunge for themselves, but did STP? I mean listen to "Opiate" and "Rage Against the Machine" side by side to "Ten" and "BadMotorFinger". Now, I won't claim that their subsequent albums were so "grungey", but I think these albums need mention.

Lastly, may I submit the idea that terms like "grunge" and "punk" are not styles as much as scenes. To me while sharing a similar essetic, values, influences and sounds, often bands in the same scene don't sound that much alike. I meansome sound closer than others, but if you take polar opposites then it's stretching it. To me Pearl Jam and Nirvana sound nothing alike (being on opposite ends). Or if we were talking about Punk, the Ramones sound nothing like the Sex Pistols who in turn sound very little like the Clash. So I think the article should mention that "grunge" is a time and place of a scene, and bands today can't be grunge anymore. To me, grunge was a west coast thing of the early to mid 1990s, just as punk was a thing of the US and UK in the late 1970s. Both are dead. A bands like Black Flag and Dead Kennedies and Bad Brians were Hardcore bands, not punk bands and thus a successor to punk. Grunge was in many ways a successor to hardcore, and alternative a successor to New Wave bands like Gang of Four and U2. But anyone trying to play "punk" or "grunge" music today are nothing but Retro bands and are imitators, not successors.

Perhaps someone more articulate than me can say this in the article. --SonOfUncleSam 08:15, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Bad Brains probably deserve mention; Tool, I can go either way; Rage Against the Machine probably deserve mention as long as we make it clear that they eventually headed elsewhere. I assume "essetic" above means "aesthetic". Yes, I agree that Pearl Jam and Nirvana are pretty far apart on the Grunge spectrum, and I agree that Pearl Jam represent one extreme, while counting Mudhoney as being even farther in the other direction than Nirvana. Anyone want to take this on?
(I'm not going to get into whether it is possible to be "punk" or "grunge" outside of the core era of each. But I smile when I see someone born circa 1987 wearing a spiked mohawk.) -- Jmabel | Talk 06:01, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, I'm a big person in the punk ethos and DIY attitude. But I wish more people like, oh let's say Nirvana for example, would realize they can be part of the greater punk movement (the movement is different than the music scene) with out mohawks. I tell these people, your music is not a fashion acessory.--128.59.143.41 05:33, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Bad Brains is punk, Tool is sorta metal, and RATM is more like nu-metal. I wouldn't categorize any of those three as grunge. As for STP, they weren't grunge per say, but they were marketed as grunge and often mistaken for it, so they deserve some mention in this article. The same can't be said for the other three bands. -- LGagnon 20:18, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm not saying Bad Brains is necessarily grunge, but proto-grunge. Not under Grunge bands, but Grunge influences. Since Niel Young and Black Flag are mentioned, I think Bad Brains definately should be. I mean what Alice in Chains, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden and Nirvana were to the grunge scene, Minor Threat, Black Flag, Dead Kennedys and Bad Brains were to the hardcore scene. And Hardcore was big influence to grunge. The quote about Black Flag is good, but I remember Krist Novoselic of Nirvana said he played "In Bloom" like a Bad Brains song, and Dave Grohl called them the "best live band ever". Zack from Rage Against the Machine had alot to say about them too. I wouldn't call RATM Nu-Anything. All this "Nu" stuff started post-1997. To me Rage's self-titled album sounds like a Soundgarden album with rap over it in many respects. Hence why many of the harder Audioslave songs sound just as much like a RATM song as they do a Soundgarden song. It's basically the Black Sabbath influence.

I've heard alot of people call Tool a metal band, and I scratch my head. To me Tool is no more a metal band than Jane's Addiction is. In both cases I could see how you might say that, but it still doesn't fit. Again I will point out that RATM (1992) and Opiate seem like grunge to me. Now something like Lateralis or Aenema and Battle of LA, definately not. But if you don't hear what I'm saying on songs like "Hush" or "Killing in the Name", then there really isn't much more I can say.

Again listen to Bad Brains's title tracks for "Quickness" or "I Against I" they sound more grunge to me than Black Flag's "My War". Personally I think that music journalism is afraid to point out Brains's influence on Grunge because of racism. But I don't feel it necessary to debate that, that's just and aside.--128.59.143.41 21:54, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Also, another addition... STP makes the grunge list but not Smashing Pumpkins? I think the Pumpkins case for grunge may even be stronger in some ways than the two LA bands Tool and RATM. And while I'm racking my brain for other potential grunge bands not from the Pacific Northwest, what about Live? "Mental Jewelry"'s song "Operation: Spirit" in particular was a college radio song. Admitadly a weaker case than the previous three, but just for consideration. Basically any group you can think of with that sound who had a album 1992 or prior with that sound I think should be a canidate to be discussed here. Though I think I got all the big ones that might have not been in this article.--128.59.143.41 04:54, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh and ANOTHER thing: what is Moist doing on the grunge bands list? If you include a post-1992 band, from Canada no less, you are opening the flood gates to bands like Cranberries to Sponge and everyone in between. I think bands in that list needed to have album out by 1992 or before. Otherwise they came after grunge broke, not before.--128.59.143.41 05:29, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, I guess we can still debate this, but I'm going to make some of the changes I was talking about.--128.59.143.41 05:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, I might have f*ed this page up a little bit because I'm not sure how to footnote, since I'm new to wikipedia. But here is a link for the Grohl quote. http://www.fooarchive.com/gpb/rebeljuke.htm

Krist Novoselci's comments are here: http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/6596252/nirvana?pageid=rs.ArtistArticles&pageregion=mainRegion&rnd=1130479027937&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.1212

The Cornell referrences is based on his comments aired on the VH1 documentary on Grunge. --128.59.143.41 06:41, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

I added your RS reference, but I didn't add the other one; it's a fan page, so its legitimacy is questionable. I'm leaving the quote in there for now, but I expect you to find out where this guy got the quote so it can be cited.
I also removed much of what you added. For one, you seriously lack sources, and you shouldn't add quotes without a source. Second of all, you took the "controversy" here and used it as part of the article. That's a bad move, because you still haven't proved that there is any controversy outside of this talk page (which is not usable as a source). -- LGagnon 01:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, the fan page mentions that the article is from "REBELLIOUS JUKEBOX, Melody Maker 97). I could be mistaken but I believe Melody Maker is fairly famous magazine from the UK. There was a comment about Husker Du being an influence on Grunge that I added the part about Chris Cornell saying it. But the original comment was not written by me. Maybe you want to put the Husker Du part back. I'll keep looking for sources. Again, I don't know how to properly source the VH1 documentray on grunge, but if you have a large email account, like Gmail, then I could actually send you the documentary and you could get the quotes from there.--128.59.143.41 14:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
I got a good quote about "in Bloom" again, this time from Grohl, "When I first heard it, it reminded me of the Bad Brains in a weird way. It reminded of “Re-Ignition.” I remember thinking, “This song is weird. I don’t think anyone is gonna like it."

http://harpmagazine.com/articles/detail.cfm?article_id=3397

Here is yet another article where grohl mentions his Bad Brains influence.http://www.wholenote.com/default.asp?iTarget=http%3A//www.wholenote.com/news/item.asp%3Fi%3D591 The Bad Brains page here on wiki, metions the Grohl quote about them being the best live band. I wonder where they got it.--128.59.143.41 15:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Nu-metal?

Nu-metal is an offspring of grunge? Hardly. It's metal; it doesn't even sound like a decendent of punk like grunge is. It may rip off a few elements of grunge, but I'd hardly consider it a true decendent of it.

On another note, it would be nice if people discussed major changes to the article before messing around with it. It's a featured article, and that should give reason not to mess around with it carelessly. -- LGagnon 00:55, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Just to point something out. Featured does not = Correct. Leyasu 12:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

But it does mean that it is quite close to it, and that should be taken into consideration so that random edits do not destroy the featured-level quality of it. -- LGagnon 13:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Agrred, but i thought that i would clear up something that seemed an obvious flaw in the logic of the spokesperson. Leyasu 13:22, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

New bands on the list

It's unfortunate that nobody discusses adding new bands beforehand. Again, we have bands being added to the Prominent bands list without discussion, despite their controversiality. The new ones added seem to be pre-grunge punk bands, not grunge themselves. Anyone have a different opinion? -- LGagnon 05:06, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Not absolutely sure which you are referring to, but I removed Dead Moon, who are simply not grunge. On the Mono Men (pretty sure that's how they spelled it, not Monomen as it was added) and U-Men, I could go either way. Certainly in terms of the breakout of grunge as a popular genre, they are pre-grunge; I'm also not sure either qualifies as "prominent". On the other hand, if they had been still around and playing when grunge broke out, everyone would count them as part of the genre. I think we should probably drop them from the list as non-prominent. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:38, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Heavy metal and garage rock

Could the person who added these to the article please explain the change made? How is heavy metal and garage more accurate, as you claim? And can you back your argument up with sources? -- LGagnon 04:37, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I didn’t make the change but I agree with whoever did. I would say listen to Soundgarden or Alice in Chains to hear the influence heavy metal had on grunge. This would be more a 1970s style heavy metal ala Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath rather than 1980s “hair” metal bands.
As far as garage rock goes I can listen to Mudhoney and hear that. But since punk has it’s origins in garage rock (and some could argue that they were really basically the same thing with different names) how could the listing of garage rock as an influence on grunge not be appropriate? Buster 22:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
The truth isn't determined by opinions. I want to see some sources. If the person who added it isn't going to rely, I'm chaning it back. -- LGagnon 23:45, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm the one who did it. Firstly, I have never heard thrash metal specifically referenced as an influence on grunge; rather, it is always heavy metal as a whole. Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Aerosmith, and KISS are among the many heavy metal bands that have influenced Nirvana, pearl Jam, Soundgarden, and others by their own admission. Conversely, the likes of Metallica, Megadeth, and and Anthrax really have nothing to do with grunge musically or culturally.
As for garage rock, one needs look no farther than "Our Band Could Be Yuour Life" to read mention of Mudhoney's constant debt to the genre. The Sonics, Wipers, Alice Cooper, and especially the Stooges (which at times are also considered punk or proto-punk) are seminal influences on grunge bands.
I'm not stridently pushing that garage rock needs to be listed as an influence; rather, it's inclusion might give people a better frame of reference as to what inspired the musicians. My main quibble is the listing of "thrash metal", which completely boggles the mind. WesleyDodds 03:22, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Garage rock may have inspired Mudhoney, but I've not heard other bands call it an influence. That's a specific influence for a specific band, not for the whole genre.
As for thrash metal, many grunge bands claimed they were parodying it in their acts (Hype! mentions this). If you could provide a specific reference mentioning heavy metal, then it'd work for the article. -- LGagnon 04:22, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Allmusic's genre description for grunge flat-out states "Using the sludgy, murky sound of the Stooges and Black Sabbath as a foundation, Grunge was a hybrid of heavy metal and punk" in the first paragraph, a description which is linked to on the entry page. Grunge bands have referenced Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, and other heavy metal bands as influences on countless occasions; Nirvana even has a song called "Aero Zeppelin". There's a paragraph in Michael Azerrad's "Come As You Are" on pg. 87 devoted to outlining the legitimization of hard rock/heavy metal bands in the underground scene around the time Nirvana released their first single. And certainly Sub Pop played up the heavy metat (NOT thrash metal) influence in press releases that touted "ULTRA HEAVY ZEP RIP-OFF". While grunge bands say they were parodying thrash in Hype!, it never served as a direct influence. It's always Zeppelin, Sabbath, Aerosmith, and the like, NOT thrash. WesleyDodds 06:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Another thing, it's more accurate to state in the opening paragraph that grunge is a genre of alternative rock rather than indie rock, since indie rock is considered a form of alternative rock. This is reflected in the article and templates for alternative rock, so it would be nice to be consistent with the other Wiki articles. WesleyDodds 03:58, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Alice in Chains certainly came out of a metal background, though I can't think of another grunge band that did. I'm sure they'd all listened to it, but it's a very different aesthetic: grunge inherited punk's opposition to guitar solos and virtuosic excess. Many of the grunge rockers were/are great musicians, but grunge always subordinated everyone (except the vocalist) to a group sound. As for garage rock, certainly an influence on Mudhoney, also The U-Men (but they were minor players), and arguably (via glam rock) MalfunkshunMother Love BonePearl Jam. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:27, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

LGagnon wanted source cites for the Heavy Metal and Garage Rock but didn't address WesleyDodds questions about the validity of Thrash Metal as an influence. I was told by LGagnon that "The truth isn't determined by opinions." In the murky world of rock music stylistic influences it partly is. The best sources you are going to get to determined a stylistic influence will be from the artists who are or were part of the genre. A rock music critic as a source will be just giving his "opinion" as to what the influences are. An educated opinion? As educated as any other obsessive follower, lover of "rock" music (include all genres please...) which I assume is most anyone here who feels strongly enough to contribute to the article or the discussion. Now getting back to Thrash Metal as influence. I don't hear it in grunge... anywhere. And grunge music is not mentioned anywhere in the wiki Thrash Metal article. Buster 16:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Good points. I should also mention that LGagnon took out the point I added that Chris Cornel cited Husker Du as an influence, and I mentioned it was on the VH1 documentary on grunge, but then he uses Hype as his source for thrash metal? Why would that part remain in the article and mine not?--SonOfUncleSam 09:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Because I cited my source and you merely mentioned yours. Wikipedia editors (all of them) need to learn citations matter a lot, and anything you add without one can be disputed. As long as we continue to allow edits without cited sources, we're always going to have problems like this. -- LGagnon 19:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Still, you didn't actually cite your source for thrash metal as an influence until this discussion started, and even then the reference is not mentioned in the article. So that's why I found it so curious that it was listed; I figured it must have been a mistake since basically any book or magazine article I pick up on grunge references 70's metal and never says a peep about thrash. What I find important is that the article discuss some sort of metal influence, period, since we have a metal influence listed and yet there's nothing about in the body of the text when discussing grunge's influences WesleyDodds 04:04, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

So do we all agree to change thrash metal to heavy metal in the article? WesleyDodds 01:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Footnote #5

A slightly off topic question to LGagnon. For footnote five, you mention most grunge bands outside the Pacific Northwest are posers. How about give example of ones that aren't. L 7 was from LA and on Sub Pop. They are a good canidate I think.--128.59.143.41 19:50, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
L7 had a rather grungy sound to them. They are often considered riot grrl, but they fit well into the grunge genre as well. And like I said, most bands from outside the scene were post-grunge. -- LGagnon 02:46, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Thrash Metal backlash

Saying that Thrash Metal was mentioned as influencing Grunge music in the movie Hype! isn't good enough to use under "origins" or in the body of the article as "inspired by". Who said it? In what context and what was exactly said? What was the exact line? I am considering replacing it with Heavy Metal as an influence. Heavy metal seems to be generally agreed upon as an influence by participants in the discussion area and WesleyDodds has come up with a cite for it.

hey, most bands in the Grunge scence were heavily influenced by Classic Rock, I would like to see something in the artcicle about that

Could you cite a source for that, or at least not throw it in there without discussing it first? -- LGagnon 02:35, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree with you, but the thing about Classic Rock is that it really isn't a genre. It's more a classification for all major rock bands from a certain era that have been accepted in the "canon" of the form, so to speak. Anyways, the Classic Rock bands that are the primary influences for grunge bands (Zeppelin, Sabbath, Aerosmith, Alice Cooper, etc.) are already covered under the heavy metal classification. WesleyDodds 02:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Anyways, the Classic Rock bands that are the primary influences for grunge bands (Zeppelin, Sabbath, Aerosmith, Alice Cooper, etc.) are already covered under the heavy metal classification. Question time, why if the bands are Classic Rock, on earth are they on a bloody metal genres article? And if its not a genre, why on earth is Classic Metal listed as a genre? Leyasu 03:38, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Wow, my arguments are coming together. Like I have stated in the template talk for Heavy Metal, I do not consider metal a completely different form of music from rock music; it is a rock genre, just like punk, alternative, prog, psych, etc. are. And Classic Metal (from reading the article) seems as arbitrary an application as Classic Rock Which is not to say they are completely useless, just that they refer to loose categorizations created years after the fact. What makes those bands more classic than the 70's wave of Zeppelin, Sabbath, Deep Purple, etc.? But I don't want to get side-tracked on other arguments. My statement here is that classic rock cane surely be listed in the template for this page, but I don't think it's necessary. WesleyDodds 04:01, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

What you consider is not fact. Fact is, its not a form of Rock music. That would be the same as saying Symphonic Metal/Neo-Classical metal is a form of Classical music. Or that Gothic Metal/Doom Metal are Gothic Rock. Its wrong, and doesnt work. If your going to say Classic Rock, you need to be listing Classic Rock bands, not ones on the Classic Metal article. Seriously, you really need to be making articles that agree with each other, not that contradict each other because someone is wanting to force their opinion to be there, in place of a musical fact. Leyasu 06:23, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
We're not continuing the "metal is/isn't a form of rock music" debate here, so let's drop it. Consequently I don't see how classic metal is involved, unless the bands overlap categories. I listed Classic Rock bands, which are also heavy metal bands. Pink Floyd's considered classic rock, but they're art-rock/prog/psych, and have no influence on grunge, so I feel listing heavy metal should be simple enough clarification. But like I said before, if everyone else thinks we should list classic rock for reference purposes (to better help people who don't know anythign about grunge to understand its roots) I don't really mind. WesleyDodds 07:33, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
There's no point in adding classic rock. The only "classic rock" bands that matter are already considered metal. And classic rock isn't even a real genre anyways; it's a radio format. -- LGagnon 18:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Exactly, it isn't a kind of music, it's a radio format. Something is only Classic as opposed to Modern. You have Modern Rock radio stations (stuff from the current decade), Classic Rock (stuff from the 60s an 70s mostly) and Oldies (50s and 60s), and now even something new called "Classic Alternative" (late 80s and 90s). The only non-heavy metal bands to have significance I think were already mentioned. In particular for Nirvana, the Beatles (Rock) and Creedance Clearwater Revival (Roots Rock).

--128.59.143.41 05:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I concur WesleyDodds 22:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Grunge Is Dead? Where Did It Go?

Born in 1990 here, so Grunge ousted Hair Metal by the time I was 2 years old, but I think Grunge is very strong today, though most of today's bands are washed out.

Grunge never "died", even in 2005 it's still called "New Rock". I think it was the last revolution in Rock, from 1995 onward Rock just combined with other genres or was fueled by nostalgia movements, such as the 80s-like emo/pop-punk/neo-wave stage we're in now.

Post-grunge, which is really just wimpy, generic grunge rock, has been the backdrop for rock ever since Kurt's death in 1994, so did Grunge really die? Lifehouse had a pretty big hit with "You and Me" and Nickelback are doing quite well, although I really hate calling them grunge.

Grunge is alive, it's 90s AND 2000s. Nobody wears flannel anymore though.

Nobody said grunge died. It simply has less popularity than it did in the early 1990s. I've reverted your POV-based edit, because you edited based on your abstract POV and not actual facts. -- LGagnon 03:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Grunge is still around, perhaps. It if is, its become a more speciliased 'underground' genre. Perhaps worth mentioning that Grunge has lost its 'mainstream' popularity to other genres? This wouldnt say grunge is dead, dated, or whatever, but would explain its commercial success and withdrawel. Leyasu 08:26, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
That is already explained in the article. -- LGagnon 12:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Then for all intents and purposes, it needs better explaining if people are getting confused, or otherwise making comments against it. Leyasu 13:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
It is explained already in the last paragraph. The 15 year old above was complaining about his POV not being represented (it won't be; Wikipedia is supposed to be NPOV) and his own assumption that the article says grunge is dead (it doesn't say that anywhere). -- LGagnon 14:16, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

While we're talking about grunge being dead, many people consider Puddle of Mudd to be a BIG knock-off of Nirvana. Would Puddle of Mudd be considered post-grunge? TearAwayTheFunerealDress 16:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and definitely not real grunge. Although I don't see how they are Nirvana knockoffs; they seem like mere grunge-in-general knockoffs. -- LGagnon 17:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Well I believe it could be because the lead singer has stated Nirvana as a big influence on his writing style and his voice. So, that may be why they are considered a Nirvana knock-off. But no reason so to why. I was just wondering if they were posy-grunge or not. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 15:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

For some reason, you seem to come across as extremely possesive of this article. With a serious case of Meglomanical Point of View. If complaints are made about the article, then people should take notice. I dont see it mentioned in the article at all. Ill read through again, but it comes across that this is your POV, and not NPOV for any intents or purposes beyond your own. Leyasu 22:35, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

As taken from Lganon's user page.

  • "These are featured articles that were mostly written by me. They have been deemed by fellow editors of Wikipedia as being amongst the best articles on this website: Grunge Music"

This is meglomanical POV. I suggest you read Wikipedia's policies, lest you be set before a set of Admins. Leyasu 22:40, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Personal attacks are a fallacy and hurt your argument; I suggest refraining from them, as they are in violation of Wikipedia's official policy. It's also worth noting that yes, I did write most of this article (which doesn't mean I can't be unbiased about it), and that a featured article is defined as being one of the best articles on Wikipedia. I only mentioned that on my page because my page is linked to on other websites and I wanted to point out what a featured article is to those unfamiliar with Wikipedia who follow those links. -- LGagnon 02:42, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Its not a personal attack, its me pointing out to you that what your doing is acting with a Meglomanical Point of View. Thats not personal, thats me trying to say, rethink what your saying, or stop talking. In a generally polite way. Ive read through, and, due to your history with the article, i suggest your add the mention that grunge lost its 'mainstream' apparel to the metal genres that were then new. Otherwise i might have to do it, and it might not fit in as well with the writing style already in the article. Taking pride in an article is all well and good, when you start claiming it as yours, your violating several Wikipedia policies. Leyasu 09:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
It is not polite to call someone a megalomaniac. Nor are the rest of your supposedly polite insults. You are only continuing to violate the policy against personal attacks, and if you do not stop doing so I will contact an admin about this.
As for metal taking over for grunge, that's an oversimplification. Electronica attempted to take over first in 1996 (the industry pushed it as the next big movement along the lines of grunge), but failed. Later, soft rock by female musicians became big from 1996-97, culumnating in the Lilith Fair. The metal bands did not come as a result of grunge, but as a backlash against the Lilith-variety soft rockers. The metal revival thus had nothing to do with grunge.
Do I think you should add your idea about it to the article? No, but not because I'm a megalomaniac. It's because your idea is factually innaccurate. -- LGagnon 16:16, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

When other users are complaining about it on the talk page, and its generally seen as something worthy of mentioning by others, its generally worth mentioning. Leyasu 22:44, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
But this isn't about the 15 years old's complaint now; it's about your attempt to add false info into the article now. -- LGagnon 23:43, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

No, this is about the complaint that the other user made, who you have proclaimed 15 simply because they disagree with you. This is also about your Meglomanical POV, and your violation of Wikipedia Policys concerning Ownership of Articles. If the article was so perfect, people wouldnt make complaints about it. Leyasu 06:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
He proclaimed him 15 because he said he was born in 1990, therefore he would be aproxmiately 15 years of age. And just because a complaint is made doesn't make it valid.