The Second Coming of Pearl Jam

June 20, 2006 11:26 PM

Brian Hiatt of Rolling Stone magazine recently spent a few days with Pearl Jam to talk about their latest album, largely hailed as their best work since Vitalogy. The result was this article, which is a must read for all fans of Pearl Jam and music historians generally. In it, Eddie Vedder discusses the stalker whose attempt on his life provided the inspiration to No Code's 'Lukin'. He reveals the real truth behind how the band arrived at the name 'Pearl Jam', and tells us of how he and Kurt Cobain reconciled their differences, albeit temporarily, as they slow danced underneath the stage at the 1992 MTV Music Awards as Eric Clapton played 'Tears In Heaven.'
posted by Effigy2000 (111 comments total)

ewww.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:46 PM on June 20, 2006

473 - 1 is pretty long odds. meanwhile - this is priceless.
posted by casconed at 11:48 PM on June 20, 2006

[not-hating-on-pearl-jam-filter] also funny.
posted by casconed at 11:50 PM on June 20, 2006

Eddie Vedder is the man, (but Kurt was orders of magnitude more talented). Vedder makes the world a better place, if only because he gives you joy through his art and makes you think at the same time. Great article. Thanks.
posted by caddis at 11:55 PM on June 20, 2006

Pearl Jam is the only band I grew up listening to that I am still listening to.
posted by Ryvar at 11:57 PM on June 20, 2006

I loved nirvana, vedder kind of annoys me
posted by WebPig at 12:06 AM on June 21, 2006

Pearl Jam is the only band I grew up listening to that I am still hating.
posted by Onanist at 12:33 AM on June 21, 2006

wow, man, what a great piece of music history writing. maybe i can cite this on my dissertation.
posted by teletype1 at 12:43 AM on June 21, 2006

Anyone remember 'Brad'?
posted by catchmurray at 12:43 AM on June 21, 2006

f pearl jam and f that lie about him and kurdt

pearl jam eddie vedder is the only band I grew up listening to Cub fan that I am still hating.
posted by tsarfan at 1:07 AM on June 21, 2006

Best work since Vitalogy? Man, Vitalogy sucks! And while I do quite enjoy the new album (and I'm kinda pissed that I have to go to a wedding when they are here in Dublin in September), I didn't find it to be all THAT great. I liked Binaural much more.
posted by antifuse at 1:14 AM on June 21, 2006

It took me years past grunge's sell-by date to be convinced that Eddie Vedder was for real (and I am – he's as real as Ian MacKaye or anybody) but I still don't like his music a lot. It's gotten better. That Ramones influence, I guess. Maybe that sense of humor the article talks about. Wish they started out like that. The article was interesting. I don't know how much stock I take in pronouncements that "big star x is the most centered, 'in the best place' he's ever been in his life" because that seems like boilerplate when talking about aging rockers.
posted by furiousthought at 1:17 AM on June 21, 2006

Sincerity != art.

That said, Veddder has integrity, and deserves his place in the sun. In the sunset though, I think. They're what, 15 years into their career, and it takes them this long to release their "boldest, most rockinest" album?

Fugazi did it in one. I could name others. But Fugazi did it in one, and they didn't have to suck any corporate cock to do it right.

Young Fresh Fellows could kick their ass anyways.

Major nitpick: Why three guitars when they only need one?

/heh, Furiousthought beat me to it. But I could name a lot of other bands with "integrity" that didn't require a decade to mature into--wah?--AOR?

Sorry, you lose Eddie. The semi-decent anthems you put together on "Ten" and then spent a career trying to decnstruct lost us all, and those who still think you have something have you lined up in their Ipods next to Dave Matthews Band and Norah Jones. Thanks for trying (which is a shorter way of saying, fuck off and try to sell your paintings or save the rainforests or something, cause music ain't your thing--you don't deserve it).
posted by bardic at 2:03 AM on June 21, 2006

Anyone remember 'Brad'?

Ah, Brad. Their first album was amazing, their second not quite as good and their third, awful. I stumbled across a new-ish release the other day, "Brad Vs. Satchel", a collection of demos and outtakes. It was far, far better than it had any right to be - better than the 2nd and 3rd Brad albums. Huzzah!
posted by TheDonF at 2:13 AM on June 21, 2006

Anyone remember 'Brad'?

That first album was awesome. I've been sneaking it on to friend's mp3 players for a while now and they're always blown away. 'Buttercup' and 'Down'... couple of my favouritest songs EVAH.
posted by chrissyboy at 2:24 AM on June 21, 2006

Wow -- I didn't even know (and probably am better off not knowing) about their second and third albums. The first album, as you both say, was great. Wonder if I can find it again...
posted by catchmurray at 2:28 AM on June 21, 2006

I always thought "Lukin" was about Mudhoney's bass player, Matt Lukin. I always wondered why Matt would be stalking Eddie.

Fuck Brad, anyone remember Green River?
posted by psmealey at 2:57 AM on June 21, 2006

what bardic said.

on a not-quite-related note, i heard the new helmet album today. singularly awful. and i say this as someone that actually bought betty.

but yeah, you're right to think, as you read this, that i shouldn't be talking about helmet in the pearl jam thread.

so i will talk about them -- they struck me as cobbled-together and inauthentic little phonies in the first place, which idea was permanently cemented in my craw when i was persuaded into playing nerf basketball by the earnestly solicitous eddie vedder at the 1991 cmj convention.

(at the time of the convention, nirvana's nevermind was the "hot topic." it had broken big in college radio, way past expectations, but had yet to go mainstream in any real way. DGC had shipped 50,000 copies, peanuts in comparison to mainstream acts but huge for anything labeled under the rubric of "alternative," but even those necessarily optimistic expectations (since nirvana was a big, high-profile signing) were soon exploded by the reality. it's worth noting that those first 50,000 do not have the 13th "hidden" track, "Endless Nameless," due to a pressing error.)

but in september of 1991, pearl jam was nothing, an embarrassing also-ran that nobody was interested in. so much so that eddie vedder himself was huckstering conventioneers to take their chance at winning a free pearl jam t-shirt. it was a testament to their contrasting (with nirvana) chumpiness that no one wanted to try to win one. it was in fact embarrassing for me when an eager vedder roped me in to trying my luck, something that a close friend who shared my disdain for pearl jam didn't let me live down for five full years.

i missed the shots -- i'd like to say intentionally, but that's not the case. he gave me a t-shirt anyway. for some reason i kept it for about 2 years but never wore it once, not even on my worst laundry day. i'd have worn mesh (if i had had any mesh, which i didn't!!!!! i swear! stop looking at me like that!) before i'd have worn that shirt.

also, did ya'll know that eddie is like 4'11"*?

*exaggeration for effect. he's actually 5'1"
posted by Hat Maui at 3:04 AM on June 21, 2006

Self parody time.
posted by fire&wings at 3:29 AM on June 21, 2006

Best work since Vitalogy? Man, Vitalogy sucks!

I don't know about that. 10 and Versus were great for their Stadium Rock Anthem vibe. All the recent stuff has sounded like it belongs sandwiched between Creed and Nickleback, with the exception of a few half-decent songs. But Vitalogy was interesting - really kind of dark and dirty. I think I might go listen to it, actually...
posted by Jimbob at 3:31 AM on June 21, 2006

Somebody will always step up to say a band sucks, because they think it makes them sound hip, when it actually makes them sound petty, and perhaps a little insecure and dorky.
posted by caddis at 5:04 AM on June 21, 2006 [1 favorite]

caddis, you suck.
posted by ashbury at 5:16 AM on June 21, 2006

This article is definitely the highlight of my morning!! Thank You!!

...The new album is incredible, BTW.
posted by drkrdglo at 5:26 AM on June 21, 2006

it's worth noting that those first 50,000 do not have the 13th "hidden" track, "Endless Nameless," due to a pressing error.

No shit? I don't know exactly when I bought my copy, but I bought it new in 1992 or 1993 and it doesn't have the hidden track. I had always assumed "Endless, Nameless" was a re-issue thing I was too early for.
posted by aaronetc at 5:59 AM on June 21, 2006

"Your former favorite band who chose obscurity for many years but are now embracing the limelight once again and coincidentally put out a critic's darling of a record sucks."
posted by papercake at 6:18 AM on June 21, 2006

I just wish they had stuck with the fight against Ticketmaster longer, and somehow managed to pull in other acts... Maybe then I wouldn't be paying $7 fees on $25 tickets nowadays...
posted by inigo2 at 6:29 AM on June 21, 2006

Pearl Jam were what they were. They had some nice songs, but they kind of wore thin pretty quick. But Vedder seems like one of the good guys more or less.

and those who still think you have something have you lined up in their Ipods next to Dave Matthews Band and Norah Jones.

Sweet Lord, are you that insecure about your 'coolness?'
posted by jonmc at 6:30 AM on June 21, 2006

Why is it the 90's again? Does modern rock suck so much that we have to go back to that time period? Red Hot Chili Peppers is another one enjoying the resurgance...
posted by agregoli at 6:40 AM on June 21, 2006

Does modern rock suck so much that we have to go back to that time period?

with a few exceptions, yeah. And the early nineties was the last time there was a lot of good music that was actually heard by people other than hipsters.
posted by jonmc at 6:42 AM on June 21, 2006

Pearl Jam were what they were. They had some nice songs, but they kind of wore thin pretty quick. But Vedder seems like one of the good guys more or less.

That sums up my own thoughts about PJ perfectly.
posted by psmealey at 6:45 AM on June 21, 2006

Fugazi did it in one. I could name others. But Fugazi did it in one, and they didn't have to suck any corporate cock to do it right.

I love Fugazi as much as anyone possibly can, but to be fair, all the members of Fugazi were in significant bands even before they began formally working together.

The members were part of Minor Threat, Teen Idles, Rites of Spring and Embrace and probably had much more experience to build on when they got to Fugazi.

On that note, I've also learned that it's nearly impossible for any band to compare well when placed next to Fugazi; the band has unquestionable integrity, musical adventurism and a nearly flawless back catalogue. It's almost unfair to compare anyone to them.
posted by aubin at 6:52 AM on June 21, 2006

aubin: to be honest with you, even though I respect them, I was never that jazzed by Fugazi musically. Just not my cuppa tea, which is ultimately what all the silly round robin musical arguments come down to. Or is it about something else?
posted by jonmc at 6:54 AM on June 21, 2006

At first I didn't like Pearl Jam but I gained a lot of respect for Eddie Vedder after hearing his duet with Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan for Dead Man Walking. Their voices really sound great together and Eddie does a pretty good imitation of his style.
posted by mike3k at 6:57 AM on June 21, 2006

But Fugazi did it in one, and they didn't have to suck any corporate cock to do it right.

I don't like Pearl Jam's music, but wow: The very last thing anyone can accuse them of is sucking corporate cock.

On their spring 1994 American tour, the band decided not to play the conventional stadiums, choosing to play smaller arenas, including several shows on college campuses. Pearl Jam cancelled their 1994 summer tour, claiming they could not keep ticket prices below 20 dollars because Ticketmaster was pressuring promoters to charge a higher price. The band took Ticketmaster to the Justice Department for unfair business practices; while fighting Ticketmaster, they recorded a new album during the spring and summer of 1994. (emph. mine)

Bands make a living from playing live shows, not by selling records. Labels/RIAA make money from selling records.

To put your livelihood on the line to improve the situation of musicians and concert-goers takes a hell of a lot more courage than snarking from behind an anonymous keyboard.
posted by Mr. Six at 6:58 AM on June 21, 2006

Somebody will always step up to say a band sucks, because they think it makes them sound hip, when it actually makes them sound petty, and perhaps a little insecure and dorky.

Or...you know...sometimes somebody will say it because a band does suck.
posted by stifford at 7:01 AM on June 21, 2006

Pearl Jam is the only band I grew up listening to that I am still listening to.

Mercy. I am old.
posted by glenwood at 7:20 AM on June 21, 2006

it's worth noting that those first 50,000 do not have the 13th "hidden" track, "Endless Nameless," due to a pressing error.

I had one. It was stolen, along with my entire CD collection, before my junior year of college.

Nirvana is the only band that I know where and when I first heard them -- A Saturday afternoon in November 1991, on Folsom in Boulder, driving to see The Fisher King.

I'm still trying to decide whether that's an interesting fact, or if it makes me really sad.

And I will admit that I was more into Pearl Jam than into Nirvana back then. Most of us were. Vs. sold 1 million copies its first week in release, and they had to go somewhere. I'm willing to bet both the Pitchfork writers of a certain age and Pitchfork haters of a certain age have copies of Vs. hidden in a box of CDs in their mother's attic.
posted by dw at 7:29 AM on June 21, 2006

Fuck you and your favorite band. If nothing else, PJ is one of the best live rock acts around.

I, for one, was very psyched to hear their latest album, considering how inaccessible and self-indulgent their last 3 or so were.
posted by mkultra at 7:34 AM on June 21, 2006

Or...you know...sometimes somebody will say it because a band does suck.

Shhh. You're interrupting the narrative. Remember your cues! Not liking a band == a sign of insecure, petty small-mindedness. Liking it == a brave, bold statement of individuality and artistic integrity.
posted by verb at 7:39 AM on June 21, 2006

cause music ain't your thing--you don't deserve it).
posted by bardic

You know, I don't own any PJ music except Ten, Vs., and the tracks from the Singles soundtrack. Just never kept an interest in where they ended up taking their music.

But bardic's comment above is just completely asinine. I mean, music is not something one earns or deserves. It's fucking music. Don't be such a dick.
posted by NationalKato at 7:59 AM on June 21, 2006

You know, I was a PJ freak for the past... well, seems like forever. Still have all the fan club singles, had a blast at the live shows, have enormous respect for what the guys have done, and love their old albums still. But I didn't buy the latest album, and sold the last two before that... less than a year after I bought them. This year I sat and wondered about whether to renew my Fan Club membership, and decided that their new music didn't do anything for me, and I let a 12 year membership (and a shot at killer seats, those amazing newsletters and some of the single coolest extras ever to come from a major label band) lapse.

So I give props to 'em, and are glad they're doing what they like for people who like what they do, but I'm just not along for the ride anymore.

(That said, Yield is their lost gem, everyone I play it for wonders why it never caught on)
posted by 1f2frfbf at 8:23 AM on June 21, 2006

Didn't Rolling Stone put out a hit piece on Eddie Vedder about ten years ago? I think Pearl Jam were in their "not talking to the media" stage and since he wouldn't do a RS interview, RS wrote a long piece (featuring Eddie Vedder on the cover) about what a tool Eddie Vedder is. I read the article, but don't remember much about it, aside from the tidbit that before Pearl Jam, Eddie was in a band called Bad Radio.

But I guess now he's forgiven RS.

I can proudly say that I never liked Pearl Jam. I had a cool uncle who knew about music and he liked Nirvana and hated Pearl Jam, so I did the same. I'll have to remember to thank him next time I see him
posted by Kronoss at 8:24 AM on June 21, 2006

Before I read the article, can someone here make it clear whether or not I like Pearl Jam?
posted by jeff-o-matic at 8:39 AM on June 21, 2006 [1 favorite]

Why is it the 90's again? Does modern rock suck so much that we have to go back to that time period? Red Hot Chili Peppers is another one enjoying the resurgance...

The nano-second that Candlebox shows back up, I'm grabbing the next clipper ship to Antarctica...
posted by BobFrapples at 8:50 AM on June 21, 2006

Pearl Jam were, are, and will always be middle of the road sentimental AOR regresso-rock for ex-hairmetal fans, guitar store workers, and ugly 17 year old girls.
posted by dydecker at 9:05 AM on June 21, 2006

I was turned on to Brad by an article in a Penthouse I stole from my older brother.

I always said Pearl Jam was pulling punches, killing their fame because they couldn't deal.
posted by Mick at 9:05 AM on June 21, 2006

dydecker, Will Rogers never met you did he?
posted by jonmc at 9:09 AM on June 21, 2006

The nano-second that Candlebox shows back up, I'm grabbing the next clipper ship to Antarctica...

That will be one full ship. The Seattle disaster management people have an evacuation plan in place in case of a Candlebox revival. I think they plan on deputizing Mudhoney to hunt them down should they attempt to play a gig here.

Pearl Jam were, are, and will always be middle of the road sentimental AOR regresso-rock for ex-hairmetal fans, guitar store workers, and ugly 17 year old girls.

And that's different from Sonic Youth how?

Oh, yeah, it's missing pretentious middle-aged critics and art school students.

Here come the Sonic Youth fans to beat me up.
posted by dw at 9:17 AM on June 21, 2006

Here come the Sonic Youth fans to beat me up.

Here I come!

Nah, whatever, you think it's pretensious, I think it aspires to intellect. You think Pearl Jam has depth, I think they're shallower than a mud puddle in August. We disagree.

But I have to say, as much as I could never figure out why anyone over the age of 12 went bananas over PJ, I really respect their beautiful, doomed attempt to subvert Ticketmaster. Ticketmaster is evil and must die, and really they were the only band with a snowballs chance to tear them down.

Of course, already being part of the inbred lable system that is in bed with Ticketmaster, it was doomed from the start, but what the hell, they tried.

Good on ya, boys.
posted by lumpenprole at 9:29 AM on June 21, 2006

Or...you know...sometimes somebody will say it because a band does suck.

yeah, but it's a little on the creepy 'i'm-gonna-go-see-this-band-i-know-i-hate-so-i-can-tell-everybody-how-much-they-suck' side...it seems strange and self-contradictory to put time/effort into making sure everyone else knows you think something is not worth the time/effort

I can proudly say that I never liked Pearl Jam. I had a cool uncle who knew about music and he liked Nirvana and hated Pearl Jam, so I did the same.

i think that sums it up quite nicely!

...i've listened to pearl jam on and off over the years, and i'm more a fan of their quieter stuff...i've always liked eddie vedder's voice...

...by the way, what's with the whole dave matthews band thing? i wasn't a fanatic, but i thought they did some cool stuff...something a bit different from what was going on at the time...the vocals and instrumentation were interesting...they were obviously talented musicians...they had their own defined sound...is it more the people amongst whom they became popular? the fact that they became so popular?
posted by troybob at 9:33 AM on June 21, 2006

I don't know how much stock I take in pronouncements that "big star x is the most centered, 'in the best place' he's ever been in his life" because that seems like boilerplate when talking about aging rockers. - furiousthought

Yeah, it's common to hear that about aging rockers. But I think most people do become more down to earth and centered and sure of themselves as they age. I think it's true of both rock stars and Joe Nobodys.

Remember your cues! Not liking a band == a sign of insecure, petty small-mindedness. Liking it == a brave, bold statement of individuality and artistic integrity. - verb

There's a difference between saying "I don't like this band" and "This band sucks" and the only reasoning behind the 'suck' claim is that the writer doesn't like their music. There's plenty of Baroque music I don't like, but I don't go around saying that Baroque music sucks because of it.
posted by raedyn at 9:34 AM on June 21, 2006

But I have to say, as much as I could never figure out why anyone over the age of 12 went bananas over PJ

because, at times, they know how to rock and kick ass? ... isn't that enough?

sometimes, people think too damn much about rock and roll
posted by pyramid termite at 9:43 AM on June 21, 2006

...by the way, what's with the whole dave matthews band thing?

Well, personally, I really never thought their vocals or instrumentation were particularly interesting. Not that they were bad, but not that they were exactly stellar either. Then they became popular with the biggest group of tools on the planet, and as such I am honor bound to hate them.

As for Pearl Jam, I frankly haven't paid any attention to them at all for quite some time. But people who have musical tastes that I respect are saying the album is good, so I might have to check it out.
posted by malthas at 9:52 AM on June 21, 2006

Anyone remember 'Brad'?
posted by catchmurray

I loved Shame more than any PearlJam record. I recently replaced the original worn-out CD when I came across a dusty copy in the sale bin at BestBuy.
posted by HyperBlue at 9:55 AM on June 21, 2006

You are all aware that no one is keeping score, right?
posted by theinsectsarewaiting at 9:55 AM on June 21, 2006

Pearl Jam never did much for me -- not a bad band, but nothing really earth-shaking. But then again, I still believe that Mudhoney's better than Nirvana, so you know where I'm coming from...
posted by AJaffe at 9:58 AM on June 21, 2006

Pearl Jam never did much for me -- not a bad band, but nothing really earth-shaking.

That's about the size of them. Not offensive to hear, but not life-changing either. Which is about what most bands are.
posted by jonmc at 10:00 AM on June 21, 2006

because, at times, they know how to rock and kick ass?

Well, that's just it. They never did, to me. They sounded kind of watery and droopy. But then, by the time they came out, I was first getting intot the Stooges, so that might of colored my view.
posted by lumpenprole at 10:12 AM on June 21, 2006

I still believe that Mudhoney's better than Nirvana, so you know where I'm coming from

I second that emotion.
posted by lumpenprole at 10:13 AM on June 21, 2006

Why do we have to have a 60+ reply thread arguing about a bands merits based on our personal opinions? I know art is subjective, but you'd think we could rise above arguing about taste, right?

I, personally, like and dislike PJ. I remember where I first heard them, and I remember when I stopped liking what they were producing. I like the latest album, and have had it in my car's CD player since it came out.

I'm still not going to call someone a jerk for not liking them. That being said, dydecker's a pretty big jerk. *wink*
posted by thanotopsis at 10:25 AM on June 21, 2006

I second that emotion.

Third.

It's hard to tell, though, because 10 years of constant radio play has turned half of all Nirvana songs into background noise, to my ears. It's not just being indier than thou, it's a real problem.
posted by furiousthought at 10:27 AM on June 21, 2006

This link and this thread is going to make me buy the new album - the first Pearl Jam album I would have bought since Ten.

60 comments on Pearl Jam - and only one has mentioned Eddie's voice (two now).

That dark track in Brad Shame with the evil vocals "Get me a beer" is freaky.
posted by Samuel Farrow at 10:46 AM on June 21, 2006

What Mr. Six said. Cripes, what does it take for a band to win the respect of the smug, sneering crowd of armchair critics shouting "sellout"? Pearl Jam withdrew from the circus, and stopped playing the game, as far as they possibly could while still having a career: no videos, no interviews, and the tilting at windmills fight with Ticketmaster, which was a noble, though doomed, cause. I have particular love for Pearl Jam, agreeing with other comments in this thread as far as their music goes, but give them the benefit of the doubt: those impossible standards of purity set by the self-righteous get old.

On the other hand, I loathed Green River with a passion, and I wasn't the only one. I saw them in 1986 in Vancouver, supporting Slow, and they went over so well with the (punk) crowd that somebody unplugged them.
posted by jokeefe at 10:46 AM on June 21, 2006

Argh. Please read "I have NO particular love for Pearl Jam." D'oh.
posted by jokeefe at 10:47 AM on June 21, 2006

Nah, whatever, you think it's pretensious, I think it aspires to intellect. You think Pearl Jam has depth, I think they're shallower than a mud puddle in August. We disagree.


I never said PJ had depth. I think they're a convenient target, though. Like Sonic Youth. :)

I never did "get" Sonic Youth, mainly because I could never get past the noise to find the actual music. And their concerts really felt like recitals versus, you know, concerts.

It's a matter of taste, of course. I know the massive scale of their influence -- Wilco, their cross-pollination with Neil Young, an entire generation of avant-garde indie kids -- but they've never really floated my boat.

I second that emotion.

Third.

Fourth. Why Mudhoney never did break out remains one of those musical questions.

It's hard to tell, though, because 10 years of constant radio play has turned half of all Nirvana songs into background noise, to my ears. It's not just being indier than thou, it's a real problem.

I know what you mean. They're turning into "oldies." They're just another song in an Abercrombie, or some light-hitting utility infielder's intro music, or what you hear played with violins and oboe while being reassured that your call is very important to GlobalCorp.

And yet, my iPod comes up with the unplugged version of "All Apologies" and I'm transfixed again. It feels like I'm watching a car about to slam into the brick wall for the umpteenth time, while the driver shugs his shoulders in resignation.
posted by dw at 10:57 AM on June 21, 2006

60 comments on Pearl Jam - and only one has mentioned Eddie's voice (two now).

Scott Stapp ruined it for me.
posted by dw at 10:59 AM on June 21, 2006

Slightly off-topic, but does anyone have/remember the lyrics to "My Life With Rickets" by Mudhoney?

BTW Pearl Jam sucks. Rember "Jeremy"? Yeah. Suck it PJ lovers, that was just a radio-friendly unit shifter.
posted by _sirmissalot_ at 11:05 AM on June 21, 2006

I would say that EV has been the most influential vocalist in the past decade or so. Everybody sounds like him (or tries to) to me. That said, you favorite Pearl Jam album sucks!
posted by bonefish at 11:22 AM on June 21, 2006

I think a big reason that Mudhoney didn't make it the way Pearl Jam and Nirvana did is that Mudhoney's sound is based on the Stooges and the Nuggets collection, whereas Pearl Jam's and Nirvana's sound comes from 1970s-era AOR, which was always more mainstream. That being said, "Touch Me I'm Sick" should have become the anthem that "Smells Like Teen Spirit" became...
posted by AJaffe at 11:35 AM on June 21, 2006

You guys are right. I owe Eddie Vedder an apology. The poor thing.
posted by bardic at 11:38 AM on June 21, 2006

I like Pearl Jam. Also, I like all their records. My favorite is probably Binaural, but the new one is good. My least favorite is probably Ten. It's singalongable, but I almost never feel like listening to it.
posted by eustacescrubb at 11:48 AM on June 21, 2006

He'll survive.

I'm just wondering why it bothers you so that others might enjoy them. I'm not a huge fan of PJ but they're not offensive to me. It's revealing to me that the attacks on the band in this thread seem to be more about the band's audience than their music, which is kind of high school cafeteria time if you ask me.
posted by jonmc at 11:48 AM on June 21, 2006

I think a big reason that Mudhoney didn't make it the way Pearl Jam and Nirvana did is that Mudhoney's sound is based on the Stooges and the Nuggets collection, whereas Pearl Jam's and Nirvana's sound comes from 1970s-era AOR, which was always more mainstream.

Putting aside that many of the tracks on Nuggets were actually fairly popular in their time (Louie, Louie, Psychotic Reaction, Dirty Water), I always thought that Nirvana tried to combine punk raggedness with 70's hard rock (Sabbath, Zep) dynamics. When they succeeded it was terrific. PJ tried to do the same thing I think, but were less succesful.
posted by jonmc at 11:51 AM on June 21, 2006

Agreed, Jonmc, but I'm thinking of Smells Like More Than a Feeling...
posted by AJaffe at 11:54 AM on June 21, 2006

I am a huge fan of Pearl Jam. I have everything they've ever released and like most of every album except "No Code," which is sort of meh to me.

I think the frequent comparisons to the Grateful Dead (not in terms of sound, but in terms of fan loyalty) are apt. When I was in high school, my peer group all hated on the Dead just because they were, you know, the Dead. We didn't understand that seeing the Dead live and being part of that whole scene totally changed your perception of the band. It was much easier for me, at 15, to just hate them because all my friends hated them and because they didn't get much radio play. The lack of radio play (especially on the local college station) meant that they obviously sucked - not even the local rock station played much more than "Truckin'." If the rock station didn't even like them, obviously they sucked.

Anyhow, I did not especially like "Ten" when it came out, and was lukewarm on "Vs." Then "Vitalogy" came out and my perception of the band completely changed. "Not for You" and "Corduroy" just hit me and I'm still not sure why. Who can say why certain music pushes our buttons and other music doesn't? Anyhow, through those songs, I went back to "Vs" and "Ten" and heard things in them that I'd never heard before.

I loved Nirvana (and still do), but they always stood for, well, nothing. Literally for nothing, which is why Cobain's suicide always made sense to me - it was his cumulative negation. I remember at the time a Seattle radio station was taking bets on whether Cobain or Vedder would commit suicide first. I never really read Vedder's lyrics as negation - more rejection, like he was looking for something desperately.

I think what he and the band found was political and social purpose. While I would never compare their lyrics or music to, say, Dylan or Lennon, I think Pearl Jam came to believe that music could effect social and political change. Some of their political lyrics are, at best, naive, but they make up for it (in my opinion) through their earnestness. Furthermore, some of their songs that touch on social issues (such as the lovely "Love Boat Captain") are positively Summer-of-Lovish in their hope for a better world.

Pearl Jam isn't a band for everybody - what band is? There are as many reasons to dislike their music as there are to like it - just like any band's music.

That all being said (and I could say a good deal more but I'm already orbiting planet Boring), and while I completely appreciate the chance to read the RS link in this FPP, I still believe that single link FPPs about bands are basically invitations to certain segments of MeFi to spend 60+ comments explaining that the band in the FPP sucks. I'm not trying to say "don't post this sort of link," but unless it is your fervent desire to see your favorite band, its fans and yourself (by inference) insulted, think twice before posting it.

On the positive side, it has been educational to discover that bands that I have always really liked (not limited to Pearl Jam, but including Sonic Youth of late) are completely despised by a portion of the world. I suppose there must be some scientific principal that states that the universe tries to balance out enthusiasm for a band with an equal amount of hatred. Some sort of musical thermodynamic thing.
posted by Joey Michaels at 11:54 AM on June 21, 2006

No shit? I don't know exactly when I bought my copy, but I bought it new in 1992 or 1993 and it doesn't have the hidden track. I had always assumed "Endless, Nameless" was a re-issue thing I was too early for.

well, there's a bit more to the story -- starting in 1994, all american pressings of nevermind were made without "Endless, Nameless."

so is it possible that you bought in '94 and got one of those?

otherwise, you'd almost have to have bought it in the very early part of '92. by summer of '92 it was platinum.
posted by Hat Maui at 11:55 AM on June 21, 2006

Agreed, Jonmc, but I'm thinking of Smells Like More Than a Feeling...

Snarkiness aside, both the songs you allude to are good ones, simply overplayed. Living in NYC, and not driving, I don't listen to the radio anymore. Three years isolation from overplayed old-school rock has allowed me toa ctually hear them again and realize what good songs they are, purist posturing aside.
posted by jonmc at 11:57 AM on June 21, 2006

WHO IS WILL ROGERS?

Pearl Jam is woodchopping music.
posted by dydecker at 12:06 PM on June 21, 2006

I'll go ahead and take Eddie at his own word. When he's interviewed in Hype!, he glances into the camera with his faux-stoned look (or maybe he really is stoned, but it looks like affect to me) and says something about how PJ got all this attention after Cobain killed himself for no reason other than luck, and that many other Seattle bands were better but just didn't get the record and video deals which they and a few select others did (no transcript available on the intarweb, maybe someone here can help me refresh my memory--I think that's a pretty accurate description).

And he's absolutely right. As I mentioned, Young Fresh Fellows were just a lot more interesting IMO. As were The Fastbacks. And others. And while PJ deserve credit for pissing off Ticketmaster, they still proved early on that they were willing to play the MTV game. This in and of itself isn't an indictment, but the fact that Vedder has always fashioned himself as a rebel when the facts prove otherwise just kind of irks me. I find their music to be very, very tedious (although I've only heard one song off the new album), but being forgettable isn't a crime. Going on and on for 15 freakin' years and having a new "return to form" album every two or three is just annoying, plain and simple.

It's like they keep threatening to paint a masterpiece. Yawn. But if you put a gun to my head I'd have to take No Code as their best, probably because they don't sound so much like PJ, if that makes any sense.

So it's a tragic combination, IMO, of watery musical talent and undeserved self-importance. I wouldn't tell anyone not to listen to them if they like them, but I'd be happy to suggest a number of other bands that do it better.
posted by bardic at 12:07 PM on June 21, 2006

I live in New York as well, and don't drive either, and the only station I ever listen to is WFMU (not being elitist, but for everyone who doesn't live in the area, New York radio tends to be very disappointing -- FMU's got something for pretty much everyone). Having an iPod has allowed to revisit a lot of things that I'd given short shrift. Nirvana is one of them -- Cobain's performance on Unplugged is haunting, given what would follow.

And I agree with you on the overplayed, old-school rock thing. Friends of mine have a Led Zeppelin party each year, where every album is played, and I safely know that I don't have to make any effort to hear the band the other 364, knowing I'll get my surgeon general's yearly requirement in one dose.

Maybe I'll even give Pearl Jam another shot. Having been in college in the magical "Our Band Could Be Your Life" era of the mid-late '80s, by the time Pearl Jam/Nirvana came along, I'd already been weaned on the Minneapolis take on youngster angst, and I wouldn't ever trade the Replacements and Husker Du for Nirvana and Pearl Jam. Not that anyone's asking me to.
posted by AJaffe at 12:08 PM on June 21, 2006

bardic: I liked the Fellows and the Fastbacks, too. While PJ weren't the best of the Seattle bands to break big (that would go to Nirvana & Soundgarden), they certainly weren't the most offensive. And like many have said, he seems sincere in his political and anti-Ticketmaster stances, which takes some balls, so he gets some respect from me for that.

AJaffe:I wouldn't ever trade the Replacements and Husker Du for Nirvana and Pearl Jam.

I like all four of them to varying degrees. And I like Thin Lizzy, Elmore James, Molly Hatchet, the Dictators, Dolly Parton and Jill Scott, too. I don't see the dichotomy between old-school/new school that so many seem to have a lot invested in. It's all rock and roll, man.
posted by jonmc at 12:16 PM on June 21, 2006

Now THAT'S a bill I'd like to see!
posted by AJaffe at 12:17 PM on June 21, 2006

WHO IS WILL ROGERS?

:)


(something about some men he met)
posted by caddis at 12:22 PM on June 21, 2006

Fugazi? I think i saw them on the V-H1, and they was playing some crazy noise and flopping about onstage. Seemed like some old bullshit to me.
posted by ELF Radio at 1:18 PM on June 21, 2006

Eddie Vedder is forever a slowly dying, drunken, wheezing antelope.
posted by cellphone at 2:19 PM on June 21, 2006

I'm curious as to whether Fugazi will put out another album. But The Evens are great--acoustic Ian, with Amy Farina (Warmers) on drums. Very different, but really good IMO.
posted by bardic at 2:59 PM on June 21, 2006

Was the tone of this FPP supposed to be ironic? Because it was dumb Rolling Stone boilerplate near as I can tell.

As for those ripping on Pearl Jam - what? Ten's a very good album, so what? People always talk about Cobain and Vedder in the same breath. Near as I can tell, Nirvana is one of those bands that you REALLY REALLY REALLY loved if one of their songs was on the stereo the first time you received oral sex, otherwise they're just a good band with a good songwriter who wrote a couple Very Good songs and a passel of good ones. There are plenty of those. (Pavement is one of them.)

Vedder's got a voice like a freight train - second and third to those who've mentioned it already. His diction is laughable, like some kind of 'Before' audio sample for a speech therapy clinic, but he can do sweetness to humour to rage in a single chorus, and that's no small thing. Cobain was never an interesting enough performer to be placed alongside the masters he's so often compared to.

Wayne Coyne is - and was very much a Cobain/Vedder contemporary when coming up, if I remember correctly(?) - but he'll never have the whiny Cult of Coyne because he had the poor judgment to clean himself up and get happy, failing the Big Legendary Suicide Test.
posted by waxbanks at 3:06 PM on June 21, 2006

Everyone is forever slowly dying.

Or did you discover the secret to eternal life, cellphone?
posted by raedyn at 3:10 PM on June 21, 2006

oh, now i get the will rogers thing. but i'm sure if you met me you would like me, jonmc! but we would never be able to talk about music except if we actually met in 1987, which is when our tastes in music last overlapped.
posted by dydecker at 3:15 PM on June 21, 2006

Alice in Chains rules.
posted by cell divide at 3:25 PM on June 21, 2006

I would say that EV has been the most influential vocalist in the past decade or so

Yeah, unfortunately. After him everybody thought it was uncool to sing without closing the top of your throat, trilling like a cuckoo, and braying like a donkey.

Half the alterna-crap being foisted as the new rock sounds like that and it makes me want to hit someone with a shovel.

Thanks for bringing that up, I just remembered the reason I hated PJ.
posted by lumpenprole at 3:47 PM on June 21, 2006

Wayne Coyne is - and was very much a Cobain/Vedder contemporary when coming up, if I remember correctly(?) - but he'll never have the whiny Cult of Coyne because he had the poor judgment to clean himself up and get happy, failing the Big Legendary Suicide Test.

I think being based in Oklahoma City has hurt as well. Other than the Flaming Lips, metro OKC has produced only three other groups of note -- Hi-Five (bleah), Chainsaw Kittens (OK), and Starlight Mints (pretty good).

But I'm a big Lips fan, even if I'm not a drug user.
posted by dw at 3:59 PM on June 21, 2006

Anyone know what Tad's been up to lately?
posted by AJaffe at 4:06 PM on June 21, 2006

Tad. Heh. A friend of mine swears to this day that a Tad show made his ears bleed. It's not unpossible.
posted by bardic at 5:12 PM on June 21, 2006

OKC has produced only three other groups of note

did you seriously just fail to mention color me badd?

guess who's never coming to your house to sex you up?
posted by Hat Maui at 6:24 PM on June 21, 2006

tad stage-dove on me once.

thus the limp.
posted by Hat Maui at 6:25 PM on June 21, 2006

OMG Hat Maui you just gave me a new search term to plug into YouTube. I am going to be so, so sad. But know this. I will have my revenge.
posted by furiousthought at 6:56 PM on June 21, 2006

Pathetic. All of you people who are trying to define how cool you are by showing your oh so public disdain for some band really are insecure dorks. When you grow up this behavior will embarrass you.
posted by caddis at 7:03 PM on June 21, 2006

have you heard of that band "caddis"? they totally suck.
posted by Hat Maui at 7:39 PM on June 21, 2006

the gtos really sucked, too ... some of them even swallowed, i bet
posted by pyramid termite at 9:14 PM on June 21, 2006

did you seriously just fail to mention color me badd?

I was trying to temper my hate-on for OKC by not mentioning them. Tulsa boy, you know.

guess who's never coming to your house to sex you up?

Hanson offered to give me MMMBop instead.
posted by dw at 10:39 PM on June 21, 2006

When you grow up this behavior will embarrass you.

As opposed to this fine post, which your mom will no doubt magnet to the refrigerator.

Chalk up another reason I dislike PJ. Turns Metafilter into LiveJournal.

Okay, I'm drunk.
posted by lumpenprole at 11:59 PM on June 21, 2006

I used to think EV was a ego-inflated jackass with minimal talent. I grew up and I still can't stand him or his sorry band.

Oh, and I danced with Kurt Cobain too, you could ask him if he weren't dead.
posted by acetonic at 12:25 AM on June 22, 2006

I always thought 'pearl jam' was a metaphor for semen. Seemed inappropriate, but there you go. Huh.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:30 AM on June 22, 2006

Now, if they'd kept calling themselves Mookie Blaylock...
posted by AJaffe at 4:56 AM on June 22, 2006

Equating maturity with liking Pearl Jam--I hope you've emailed this thread to EV caddis. He'd be very proud of you.
posted by bardic at 6:38 AM on June 22, 2006

not liking pearl jam, just not making a spectacle of oneself with pretentious hate for a band
posted by caddis at 6:51 AM on June 22, 2006

I always thought 'pearl jam' was a metaphor for semen. - stavrosthewonderchicken

That's far and away better than the real story behind the name. I dig it.
posted by raedyn at 7:14 AM on June 22, 2006

i always thought "duck butter" was like regular butter, but more duck-y.
posted by Hat Maui at 2:13 PM on June 22, 2006

What if Fudgetunnel and Butterglory got together for a split EP?

Oh, the possibilities. . . .
posted by bardic at 2:20 PM on June 22, 2006

Ya know I saw PJ a few years ago and Duck Dunn was sitting on bass!
posted by stevil at 11:41 AM on June 26, 2006