Pages

Saturday, February 5, 2011

Cobain vs Grohl


Would you rather be a flash in the pan or have a long and steady career?  On the surface, this seems like a very easy question. Most people would rather have a long, steady career with some ups and downs along the way. A long steady career in any field sounds like a good way to live life. Steady income leads to being able to do the things you want to do. But imagine for a second that you are a real flash in the pan. You are one of the most popular and recognizable people in the world. You are ultra-super-mega-famous. You are the voice of a generation.  You are Kurt Cobain.

Ok. So, you are not actually Kurt Cobain, but hopefully you see my point. Back in 1992, Cobain was one of the most recognizable people in the world. The songs he created with the band Nirvana dominated the airwaves. Nirvana’s songs ended a whole decade of hair metal and began the (albeit short) grunge era. He was a bright flash in the pan because of the music he brought to the world. He was a reluctant super duper music icon. His mega-star status lasted only as long as he wanted it to last. Unfortunately, it did not last long because, as you may be aware, he put a shotgun in his mouth in April, 1994 and ended it all.  You could say that had he not ended it all, his star may have eventually withered and he might not be regarded as the icon he is today.

When their band was disbanded following the death of its front man Cobain, Nirvana’s drummer Dave Grohl came out from behind his drum set to lead his own band called Foo Fighters. Now, Grohl’s Foo Fighters are a very good band. They have a bunch of good albums and a bunch of good songs (of course, in my own humble opinion). What is interesting here is that by ending his career and his life, Kurt Cobain simultaneously helped create this other band. In many ways, the band he helped create is the exact opposite of the band he left behind.  

Nirvana, for all intents and purposes, is (was) the proverbial flash in the pan. Whether you like their music or not, the fact is that they were one of the biggest bands in the world during the three years between 1991 and 1994. The Foo Fighters, however, have been (and still are) a steady working band and have been since the death of Nirvana and Cobain. They are not the super-mega stars like Nirvana was, but they have sold a lot of albums (5 platinum) and played in front of millions of fans (including Yours Truly).

Obviously, most people would rather be alive than dead so the Cobain vs Grohl argument is rendered nonexistent. So, a better question would be, would you rather be in one of the biggest bands (possibly THE biggest) in the world for 3 years or be in a steady working band for years and years to come? Would you rather be regarded as an artist who changed the world with a single 4 bar riff or would you rather have a steady career but never be considered transcendent?

It must be great to be Dave Grohl, because he can say he was part of both.

1 comment:

  1. The other question to pose to is whether or not you want to be known more as a musician or the icon? Whereas Cobain is the more popular figure, Grohl's musical accomplishments truly makes Nirvana look like the one trick pony they were. The Foo Fighters variety of musical style keeps their music fresh. Grohl also has had a few side projects, like Probot (a NIN style death metal album where he did all music and had a legendary metal guest vocalist for each song). I would consider Grohl's achievements to be much more substantial. Some may say that he would have never reached them had Cobain not blown his head off, but I beg to differ. I don't think you would be able to keep a talent like that behind a Nirvana drum set forever....

    ReplyDelete