Nirvana and Punk

It's always said that Nirvana 'brought back Punk'...And while I agree they certainly made a lot of unknown bands or forgotten bands known to a new generation because they cited them as influences, I honestly don't see a big musical connection between Punk and Nirvana.

Nirvana, to me, musically, is a mix of later post-punk or indie punk bands like The Pixies, The Breeders, mixed with the poppy side of The Beatles and some Stooges/Aerosmith influences. Musically speaking, I've never seen a real connection between Nirvan and say Fear, Black Flag, The Dead Boys, The Misfits or even The Sex Pistols. A lot of that stuff was very raw and straight forward and angry, not the most melodic or artsy kind of stuff. Even the early songs like "About a Girl", "Love Buzz" and 'Negative Creep' have a poppy or hard rock edge to them. Kurt Cobain might have been political in magazines and interviews, but Nirvana's music never really got into politics - there's no "God Save the Queen/She Ain't No Human Being" nastiness.

And that brings me to another point. Punk was nasty, it was the music of the gutter, it was angry, blistering, raw and the music of hoodlums. Street music for street kids, hence the name of the genre. Nirvana, while raw in some ways, never struck me as angry or p--sed off or blistering with rage and indignation. Their music always had a poppy gloss and a mainstream sheen which kept them out of the gutter, and their lyrics were way too politically correct to be as raw and dangerous as punk was.

I mean, Nirvana never wrote a song like 'I Don't Care About You', that angry or hateful. They never wrote a song as utterly jaded as 'I Wanna Be Sedated' or as groovy and irrelevant as 'I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend' or 'Everytime I Eat Vegetables, It Makes Me Think of You'; They never wrote anything as dark or sardonic or profound as the line "Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine..." or as blunt and raw as "People Who Died."

While Nirvana certainly had a lot of punk influences, I think their status as the 'rebirth of punk' or the 'ultimate punk band' is a bit overblown. They were always a bit too glossy, a bit too artistic, a bit too mainstream in sound to be the new Sex Pistols. I've always considered Nirvana to be the more aesthetically pleasing Pixies or Breeders, musically and otherwise.

 

Except that Nirvana had recordings out before The Breeeders.

 

I was in my late 20's when Nirvana broke, living in Portland and still reading and actively caring about the rock press. I don't remember them presented or represented that way.

 

Playing music fast and energetic =/= punk

 

Well the best way to start a ridiculous discussion is a) state a premise that never was -- then b) disagree or agree with that.

 

When I first heard them on the radio (Smells Like Teen Spirit), I pictured a long haired thrash metal band.
I was never a fan but it was good that they came to popularity and sold NOISE. Just a pity that it wasn't the superior Pixies instead.

 

I always agreed with the whole 'Nirvana is the punk Beatles' idea.... You get the aggression of punk with Nirvana... but some pop-esque/catchy sort of flavors... Nirvana was awesome... still is an awesome band.

 

Anything that deflated the hair band era was and is fine by me irrelevant of what barf press and agents pushed

 

Didn't really deflate hair metal. You figure Adrenalize by Def Leppard went multi-platinum in '92, Get a Grip was a mega seller in '93, Van Halen's Balance in '95 was a hit as well. Bon Jovi was still cranking out hits into the '00s. The other "hair metal" bands of the period either broke up or imploded internally around this era. But three of the biggest names were still multi-platinum acts well after 1991.

 

And yet in 1993, In Utero, the harbinger of that punk sound (cause you know, cellos and violins are so punk rawk) was mega outsold by Vs. by Pearl Jam.

 

Big fan. But Nirvana is not punk. Pixies is not punk. Breeders is not punk. Guns N Roses is not punk. Green Day is certainly not punk. There was no punk in the mainstream in the 90s, it's joke to call it that.

 

Nope.

 

No it isn't...

 

When Bleach came out, Nirvana absolutely toured on the same circuit as punk and hardcore bands. Their own points of reference were largely what we would have called hardcore at the time, though they always had a touch of pop melody. They're of a piece with bands like Naked Raygun. By the time Nevermind came out they were part of the machine.

 

Nobody ever said Nirvana was a punk band, they were just clearly influenced by it. I wouldn't say their music always had a 'poppy gloss' at all, that may apply to Nevermind but that's not their only album and they DID have some very aggressive material like Territorial Pissings even on their most commercial album. Also Rape Me doesn't sound like a very 'politically correct' song title or what about that old Jesus with a Santa Claus hat on a crow-ridden cross, the little KKK girl and all the fetuses on the Heart Shaped-Box video?

Nirvana was not all About a Girl and Lithium:

 

First you tell us Nirvana were too mainstream and commercial. Then you knock them because another band sold more records.

 

I'm a pretty big fan and was around when they broke big. I don't ever remember then and since your above statement being a common statement.

 

It's just kinda ironic that the supposedly raw and stripped down Nirvana who were the vanguards of punk....were knocked off the charts by a classic rock band.

 

Not all punk is created equal. Have you heard the Wipers? Huge influence on Kurt, who practically Xeroxed their sound on a couple songs, and inarguably punk. How much of this noise is really just asserting that bands from 1988 are less punk than bands from 1978?

 

Why? Not being on top of the charts should make them even more punk, not less. I fail to see the irony.

 

You have a very strange obsession with Nirvana; they obviously fill your thoughts a lot. They're just a rock band - from 20+ years ago. They were not the 'vanguards' of punk, or indie, or whatever. Like most bands they were an amalgamation of different styles and sounds that preceded them.
By the late 80's punk was a decade old, a genre that arose for a few brief years at the end of the 70's, influenced rock & pop culture, and morphed into related styles and sounds. Punk wasn't (as you put it) the music of hoodlums. Too much drama dude.

 

Oh, yay, another thinly veiled 'Guns 'N' Roses was better than Nirvana' thread. What is this ? #65 in a series of 100?