“Generational Gap in Music…I don’t buy it” | by Patrick Delehanty

I have an opinion on everything. As anyone who has ever held a conversation with me longer than 5 minutes, or listened to this podcast, knows; I have an opinion. I don’t like to hold back and I think it sometimes gets misconstrued as my ill faded attempt to sound intelligent. Whether I do sound that way or not, that way being “intelligent”, I’ll never know; you hear yourself different than the audience because you know what you’re getting at and you know what you know. Miswording things can make a world of difference. I’m sure I’ve embarrassed myself more than enough on this show and I probably will more, life goes on.

Now, I have an opinion that I never really had a chance to defend on the show, or really ever, so I figured I’d make my first article based on this. There have been multiple times in conversation I have said the words that sometimes gets a head scratch or an odd “huh?” look, and those words are simply “I don’t like Nirvana”. There’s a taboo with that statement, it’s almost like you took a piss on the entire spectrum of music in one simple statement for some people. Am I completely alone in this statement? Absolutely not, and I feel that there are just as many people out there that love Nirvana that don’t enjoy it.
On the episode we did with Donkey Boy (which was a great episode, if you haven’t heard it, it’s in Season 1- Dave just has amazing things to say and is always entertaining, I suggest you read his articles too) Chip said “This guy (being me, Patrick) doesn’t get it, it’s a generational thing” when Nirvana was brought up. I would agree that it is a generational thing to the extent a.) I wasn’t old enough to listen to Nirvana, I was 7 when Cobain died, b.) I would have had no way to see Nirvana, like Chip, and c.) their music wasn’t accessible to me. Coming from that statement Chip made, I don’t believe that should be viewed as the basis of my reason for not liking Nirvana- in fact, I find it very disheartening to be painted with that brush.

Two and a Half Men

Do I respect Kurt Cobain, Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic (whom I have met a couple times), and also to an extent Pat Smear, for what they did and how they did, in Chip’s words, “open the floodgates” for other bands? Yes I do. And even beyond that, Jack Endino, Butch Vig and Steve Albini for their direction in producing? Totally do. I do agree with DeCastris more though that Sub Pop took a chance on this band and they really opened up the road for Nirvana to do what they do, but Nirvana definitely blew people away with what they did, as they should have. Here is what I am getting at in my defense, I don’t like Nirvana on the basis that their music doesn’t appeal to me, I simply do not find myself ever saying “I want to listen to Nirvana”. Same with Barbara Streisand, Celine Dion, Depeche Mode, Led Zeppelin, The Rolling Stones, and T-Pain; there is music I will absolutely love even with impact on a grand scale, and music I won’t give a second head turn to under the same circumstances.

If the case is made that not liking a band is simply a generational thing and that one doesn’t like a band because “they don’t get it”, then we would really have no right to like bands that we weren’t alive to witness, because we don’t understand their impact in comparison with the person who was there and loves the band. This is pretty much saying “Your taste doesn’t matter because you weren’t there” either way you look at it. If I were to enjoy Nirvana today, would I suddenly get the impact they had like Chip does who was there to witness it at the time? No, of course not, it doesn’t change the fact that “I wasn’t there”. Case in point- I’m not a Pink Floyd fan, but I love bands they inspired, same with Nirvana. I understand they changed things, but I don’t care for their music.

I absolutely love Motown and I enjoy the blues movement, but I’ll never know what it was like to see black artists for the first time on stage being “socially acceptable” to a white audience- which was an amazing feat for the times. I understand the impact of what happened and I love those bands. I understand Nirvana’s impact, I just don’t like Nirvana. But to play devil’s advocate with Chip’s reasoning, if you have the same rules for people who don’t like it, you have to have the same rules for enjoying it, which completely defeats the purpose of personal taste.

In the same vein of Nirvana’s impact as far as not enjoying the source but what came from it, hip hop is one of the most amazing things I have ever encountered; I love the intelligence behind artists like A Tribe Called Quest, De La Soul, Black Star, Mos Def, Talib Kweli, and bands like The Roots, just to name a short few. And I even love the extent of artists that take the amazing art of something that has been created and making it into a fresh, tasteful use of sample. However, I don’t like Sugarhill Gang (who however used a sample which I did enjoy in “Rapper’s Delight”) and later N.W.A- I just don’t care for their music. Same with Tupac and same with D.O.C. N.W.A changed music, they really did, but in this case I just appreciate something that came from it and not the source itself- those bands are breathing their influence, I just may prefer someones take on previous works.

Nirvana and Thriller have a baby.

I love “Off The Wall” and “Thriller” by Michael Jackson, but post 1990 I could careless for Michael’s music. I wasn’t alive for when “Thriller” changed everything for R&B and pop music, but I consider that album to be a phenomenal and groundbreaking record. Now, since I don’t like Michael Jackson post 1990 I must not understand his impact on music post “Bad”? No, that’s not true, you see it everywhere, but I will never understand what it meant when “Thriller” came out at that moment- “Black or White”, “Remember the Time”, “Scream” and “Heal the World” are influential songs he made in the 90′s that people really love, I just don’t. This is a case of loving the source (Michael’s first couple solo records) but not really enjoying what came after it (1990 on and a lot of artist’s that took his cue). Flip side being, I do see and understand Nirvana’s influence everywhere and everyday (what came after them); but again, I just don’t like the source (Nirvana).

Here’s what I am getting at, trends and influence happen every day, and who know how they will impact us tomorrow. Some are revolutionary like when Robert Johnson recorded his songs and when Cobain wrote “Smells Like Teen Spirit”, and some are a blip in history like when Kanye wore shutter shades and McCartney and Stevie sang “Ebony and Ivory”. Right now, the Dirty Projectors are considered a “groundbreaking” band that are changing music in some respects. I don’t enjoy them even though I am witnessing their trend, but I suppose it’s not as grand of scale, we won’t know until tomorrow how many people will remember or not remember them. However, I love their sources like Talking Heads and Bjork to name a couple. I just found it to be a completely unfair assessment of someone’s personal taste to say “you weren’t around, so your reason for not liking it is totally unfounded”. I understand social impact, I understand trends, I like what I like, I like what I don’t like, I wouldn’t expect any less of someone reading this article. Either way, hope you’ve enjoyed reading and listening- happy trails.