November 04, 2002

Generations -

again, same stuff as yesterday - got to thinking.

I was thinking about musicians again but more specifically - Nirvana.
Now I watched a thing on VH - 1 about Nirvana and it was all about blahety blah blah blah they're so great.
But one thing caught my attention it was that age-old saying that " Nirvana was the voice of a new generation "
For some damn odd reason I kept thinking about that, it kept bothering me.
I didnt know why - until I thought of someone else :

Beck - To my recolection, Beck came out relitavely around the same time, or a bit after - Nirvana. I dont quite know. I do know however that the song with the refrain : " Im a loser baby, So why dont you kill me? " - Pioneered Beck into being " The voice of a new generation " - And I found that funny. The more I thought about it - Everyone always refers to " The voice of a new generation " and then adds : " Just as The rolling stones epitomed their generation with ' Satisfaction ' " - and it continues to bother me.

Why is it that musicians are seen to be zeit-geists ( OH MY JESUS, WE'LL HAVE TO TAKE A PHILOSPHY CLASS TO FIGURE THAT WORD OUT! ) - and forerunners of a generation? Just because someone makes a song and a lot of people listen to it and enjoy it makes them " a generation " - It makes me want to make a song about how much I dont give a shit about anything and nothing holds any real value for me. I dont know... This post is being botched. I wanted to make a point but I dont think I've made it. Who is the voice of our generation? Where is our song? Ooops, are you doing it again? I have to congratulate Zacho on one thing, and I will end this post with a quote from zacho - an example on why I love his anu--- ... err ... why I love him - not necissarily any specific part of his anatomy - so very much.

so i think that musicians should strive to find a balance between the two.
...but wait..that wouldnt be profitable now would it?

No comments:

Post a Comment