Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Neil Young songs are great and all, but I think we'd all rather Hendrix, Joplin, Cobain, etc had decided to fade away.
This brings up an interesting point. Not all incredible musicians/artist/performers age gracefully. It's entirely possible that some of the names you listed here and in your other post wouldn't have kept up the quality of their work and could have fallen off. I always look at a list of those "gone too soon" people and wonder whose legacy was actually helped by an early demise.
Neil Young songs are great and all, but I think we'd all rather Hendrix, Joplin, Cobain, etc had decided to fade away.
This brings up an interesting point. Not all incredible musicians/artist/performers age gracefully. It's entirely possible that some of the names you listed here and in your other post wouldn't have kept up the quality of their work and could have fallen off. I always look at a list of those "gone too soon" people and wonder whose legacy was actually helped by an early demise.
But so what? Michael Jackson had an epic fall from grace, and it was still sad to see him go in the end, and we still collectively see the value in his best work.
This brings up an interesting point. Not all incredible musicians/artist/performers age gracefully. It's entirely possible that some of the names you listed here and in your other post wouldn't have kept up the quality of their work and could have fallen off. I always look at a list of those "gone too soon" people and wonder whose legacy was actually helped by an early demise.
But so what? Michael Jackson had an epic fall from grace, and it was still sad to see him go in the end, and we still collectively see the value in his best work.
Michael Jackson had an epic battle with personal issues which never stopped him from being one of the biggest names in the world when it comes to putting on a show.
I'm talking about people who would have slipped professionally, people who would have started putting out sub-par music in order to stay relevant. Michael Jackson could have not put out a single album after Bad and he would have remained relevant until his death. Using him as an example in relation to someone like Brian Jones isn't really fair, imo. MJ was the biggest star ever, he's the exception far more than he is the rule.
But so what? Michael Jackson had an epic fall from grace, and it was still sad to see him go in the end, and we still collectively see the value in his best work.
Michael Jackson had an epic battle with personal issues which never stopped him from being one of the biggest names in the world when it comes to putting on a show.
I'm talking about people who would have slipped professionally, people who would have started putting out sub-par music in order to stay relevant. Michael Jackson could have not put out a single album after Bad and he would have remained relevant until his death. Using him as an example in relation to someone like Brian Jones isn't really fair, imo. MJ was the biggest star ever, he's the exception far more than he is the rule.
I just think it's stupid to ever think it's better to die young (which I know isn't what you're saying). It certainly might be better from a career perspective to hang it up at some point. But the saying isn't "its better to retire than fade away." It's never good to "burn out."
Agreed on that (I voted "fade away"), it's just something interesting to consider. Believe me, I'd have taken a 60-70+ year old Jimi the past decade and a half over listening to the same 2 albums 100 times.
Post by davidbyrnesbutler on Oct 16, 2013 15:53:54 GMT -5
Jim Morrison and The Doors would arguably be a less respected band if Morrison had not died as early because Morrison was already in free fall with his alcoholism. He was at the point of shouting obscenities to his crowd and urging them to break numerous laws and getting arrested for it (especially the Miami incident.) I just think it makes "Rider On the Storm" an even more mysteriously great song knowing that it was their last recorded song before his death.
Post by steveternal on Oct 16, 2013 16:00:31 GMT -5
Y'al seem to be confirming what I already thought. It is very rare for an artist's latter-day work, or general life, be so poor that it actually detracts from their earlier work. Mediocre work later on is still better than nothing.
I'm just now wondering if I had this article in mind subconsciously when I started this poll...
Jim Morrison was a drunk idiot, and the Doors instrumentals sound like sh*tty carnival music. They were a terrible, terrible band.
Correction: Jim Morrison was a hard drug addict. I agree that their music is horrible except for maybe like.... 3 songs? People just love to idolize young druggies like Joplin and Morrison. I'm not sure why.
Also many of these artists are only so fondly remembered because they didn't stick around long enough to wear out the welcome. Obviously you don't want anyone to die, but there has to be an acknowledgement that so many creative forces are continually recognized as genius because they hadn't yet reached that point where they'd exhausted the good ideas and started sh*tting out the bad ones. I mean, if Oasis dies in a bus accident after Morning Glory, they're the greatest band in 20 years. If U2 perished in a horrible self-importance incident sometime around Red Rocks we're revering them as ahead-of-their-time standard bearers. You could go on and on.
Also the Doors f*cking sucked.
I agree with your basic points (including the one about the Doors). However, while many artists are indeed romanticized for their meteoric oeuvre, that's a small factor. Not everyone gets romanticized. But more to the point, it seems to me that there are very few instances in which the acclaimed early work of an artist loses its status among fans (or the culture at large) due to shoddy latter-day work. To bring that concept back around, the existing work of artists who are romanticized for dying young would perhaps no longer be "romanticized" per se if the artist had lived on to make more music, but likely their work would receive the same level of esteem.
I know it's all speculative, but let's take, oh, Nick Drake. He's mysterious because his tiny output is stunning, and yet didn't really become celebrated until long after his suicide. His story has all the elements to make a good portrait of the suffering artist (cue Don McLean's "Vincent"). But it doesn't seem to me that, had he lived on, and made several more albums into the late 70's and 80's, perhaps coming to overindulge in synths, and collaborating with Phil Collins, that what might have been mediocre music later on would spoil those first three amazing albums.
Conversely, take The Beach Boys. Man, there has been a ton of worthless crap done under that venerable name. Might it have been better if they had all died in a bus crash right after "Smiley Smile"? No; Pet Sounds is still considered one of the greatest albums of all time, and "Kokomo" can't do anything to diminish that.
If longevity is a threat to anything, it is only to the myth inherent in romanticizing dead idols. I'm glad Oasis went on, if for no other reason than so "Morning Glory" could have all the praise it's due, and not an ounce more.