Straight to Video
Rock Art Rock
See more in the Rock Art Rock gallery.
polls
Loading ...
Why Rock and Funny Just Don’t Mix
The Barenaked Ladies embody a lot of what’s wrong with rock ‘n’ roll music these days. I’m not saying every song they’ve ever written is pure drivel. That one about the old apartment is sort of catchy and every now and again I catch myself bebopping to “It’s All Been Done.”
It’s more of a big-picture issue. See, the Barenaked Ladies are—for lack of a better way of putting it—silly. They’re slapstick-happy and sandlot-safe. And a lot of their lyrics read like teatime at the Romper Room, which is, quite frankly, really irritating.
To wit: “I could hide out under there / I just made you say ‘Underwear.’”
Bleck.
I mean, if this is the type of angle we’re going for, why not just sing the word “poopie” 15 times or more? Maybe mix it up with “poopie in my pants” every now and again. Same difference, right?
It wouldn’t be so bad if there wasn’t an audience for that type of thing. But there is. The Barenaked Ones have a considerable fanbase (at least they used to). And no matter how many times they play “Pinch Me” live, the crowd continues to eat it up.
There are other examples from the BNL canon, like the “Chickity China, the Chinese Chicken” refrain from “One Week” or the line “I’m so chill / No wonder it’s freezing” from “Falling for the First Time.” But again, this speaks to a much larger issue.
And the issue is this: Rock music and funny just don’t mix.
Never have. Never will.
That’s precisely why you’ll never hear anyone refer to “Weird Al” Yankovic’s music as “timeless,” why guys like Kinky Friedman will always exist on the fringe, why a great show like WKRP in Cincinnati only lasted four seasons.
Rock ‘n’ roll is serious business. It’s about grit and guts, struggle and adversity, triumph and tribulation, love and loss. It’s about the grand themes that govern our lives and keep this crazy world spinning round. Rock music should make you want to drink or drug, fight or fuck, cry or create, to charge through walls of great granite.
It is—after all—devil music, is it not?
That’s not to say that rock ‘n’ roll isn’t about joy or redemption, that great music shouldn’t inspire or amuse. 
But it is to say that cheesy, lighthearted fare really has no place in that arena.
Give that type of music its own genre. Call it “recess rock” or “elevator casual.”
Call it Jimmy Buffett, if you like. ‘Cause that’s really what it boils down to.
Don’t get me wrong. Jimmy Buffett is a talented guy with a string of hits to his credit. But his music sounds like adult contemporary masquerading as acoustic rock. And the whole parrothead thing feels like Mardi Gras for golf enthusiasts—dress up like Hawkeye Pierce, pour a Captain and Coke, and knock around a beach ball for an hour or two.
Be safe. Be predictable. Get home in time for Letterman.
Throw your fist in the air and high-five one another to “Why Don’t We Get Drunk (and Screw)” and belt that shit out like it speaks to something buried deep down in the pit of your soul. But please don’t call it rock ‘n’ roll.
That goes for the next generation of Buffetteers as well—spinning Jack Johnson till the trust fund runs dry. Jack Johnson—much like Dave Matthews—is talented, but he inhabits a space in music reserved for post-grad barbecues and sorority luaus.
It’s light and it’s loose and it’s happy-hour friendly. And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. But it sure ain’t rock ‘n’ roll.
Never was. Never will be.
There is, of course, a place for humor in rock music. But those who excel at it are more cunning and self-aware, drawn to subtext. Dylan’s lobbed more veiled insults over the years than most people have softballs. Remember when he quipped, “I received your letter yesterday / About the time the doorknob broke,” or that time he waxed poetic about the leopard-skin pillbox hat? There are layers to Dylan, like coats on a canvas. And in many cases, you have to strip them down to the base before you can see the whole picture.
Dylan is art and he’s rock ‘n’ roll and he’s humorous in the sense that we’re all in on the joke. But unlike a one-liner that hits you square in the funny bone once or twice before losing its appeal, Dylan creates a kaleidoscope where a line, stanza, or even an entire song can take on a completely different look or feel depending on the context.
That’s not only satire, it’s brilliant.
The same can be said for the Kinks’ “Lola” or Dire Straits’ “Sultans of Swing.” The same can be said about “One Night Stand” by the Pipettes or “Westby” by Kathleen Edwards. The same can be said about any number of songs by Tom Petty.
The same cannot be said about any song written by John Mayer.
See how it works?
With country music you either laugh or you cry. Early rap battles were predicated upon one artist’s ability to verbally slam another, and the blues, well, the name says it all. But when it comes to rock ‘n’ roll, you need to earn some points for style before you can even consider serving up a side of sarcasm.
And while punk is definitely a form of rock ‘n’ roll, punks get a pass on the whole “silly” thing because they are—for lack of a better way of putting it—punks. The Ramones have carte blanche when it comes to penning tunes about teenage lobotomies in much the same way the Dead Milkmen are free to sing about bitchin’ Camaros and retards at the zoo.
Blink 182, on the other hand, should have been prohibited from making music altogether. Blink made videos around the turn of the century that were so horrendously unfunny they caused me to doubt the existence of a god. Blink 182 is silly without being smart. Blink is dudes in banana suits and posturing and Tiger Beat pin-ups. Blink 182 is bubblegum pop for suburban soccer chicks. Punk rock rejects them on principle.
In the end maybe it’s just a matter of what one person finds clever or entertaining as opposed to another. There’s obviously a precedent for acting goofy and going for the cheap laugh as a means of achieving celebrity. But sooner or later that type of thing has a way of catching up with you. Just ask the Barenaked Ladies. On May 6th of this year, they released their first children’s CD, entitled Snack Time.
Funny how things work out, isn’t it?
Read more articles by Bob Hill:
56 Comments
Barenaked Ladies are brilliant. Lighten up and appreciate it.
We thoroughly disagree with the premise of this article.
Also, I don’t understand how “Snacktime!” is somehow BNL’s trademark goofiness “catching up with them.” They all have kids now and wanted to make a kids album. And it reached the top 10 in Canada and #61 here in the states. Not Hootie numbers, sure, but I think the band is perfectly content with them.
If Barenaked Ladies no longer have a large fanbase, why are they holding a cruise for their fans for the third year in a row? http://www.shipsanddip.com
If you truly think BNL are a “joke” band, check out the lyrics for songs like “War on Drugs,” “Great Provider,” “Call and Answer,” and 99% of the rest of their songs… They are often clever, yes, but they are not fluff and silliness.
Did someone just argue that BNL has a fan base because they are hosting a cruise? Uh boy. Star Trek runs cruises too. U2 and Springsteen don’t.
Awwww. Someone needs a hug.
Come on, I’ll give you a little cuddle.
I know Bob. You know a lot about music. You take it very seriously.
But honey, maybe it’s better to let the other folks do their own thing – there’s no real harm in it.
Maybe if you’re a little nicer, everyone will see how fun you are.
And they’ll invite you to their barbeque next time.
Love,
Your Mama
Did did someone else just argue that Star Trek has no fan base? That’s pretty laughable.
I give the author the credit that he is looking at the music the band releases – ie singles -which is what they promote to the public, and not the band’s full catalogue. If you want to look at full catalogue, simply read the lyric for the song “War on Drugs” and I think you’ll be hardpressed to consider them all joke.
But that said, even amongst their singles, What a Good Boy, Call and Answer, Brian Wilson, Old Apartment, Shoebox, All Been Done, Too Little Too Late, Testing 123, Easy, Wind it Up, Pinch Me… Sure, their songs might have ONE lyric that is a joke (underwear). If you believe that defines the entire song as a joke, that’s a naive attitude (was West Wing a sitcom just because it had funny moments?)
If you think Barenaked Ladies humour is not timeless, why are you still humming Old Apartment, a 12 year old single; and why does “If I Had $1000000″, perhaps one of the most light-hearted singles, generally considered timeless and has been ranked in the top x of Canadian music on many many lists?
PS: “Chickity China” is not a refrain, as it is sung once in the song, and “I’m so chill / No wonder it’s freezing” Never struck me as a JOKE. It is a play on words, and I never saw it as an attempt to get laughs.
I’m confused why “Chickity China the Chinese Chicken” is a crappy joke that is anything but timeless, but one of the greatest rock bands in history is praised for lyrics like “na na na na na na na, Hey Jude” and “I am the eggman/They are the eggmen/I am the walrus/Goo goo g’ joob”. I see what you mean about it not being timeless.
The Barenaked Ladies (I mean, what kind of band name is THAT? A joke name.) are not brilliant.
Aw, do you kids hang out on a Barenaked Ladies message board? That is just plain adorable.
Yet another article by a white critic limiting the definition of “rock ‘n’ roll”. Let me guess – Rock n’roll is only music endorsed by (SUPRISE!) the white critical establishment.
Of course, any artist that has connected with a large audience without the blessing of the white critical establishment is not Rock ‘n’ roll.
Is it any wonder that Indie rock blows so hard now, the province of a white upper class looking down its nose? White critics have re-defined Rock ‘n’ Roll so many times to suit their own needs that there is nothing left of the original form. Have a laugh!
to bleh: way to stay on topic, dude.
besides, i think bob’s point was that he prefers rock music with a soul.
Backspace: his topic was “funny music is not rock ‘n roll.” Its a variation on the same old tired “X is real Rock, Y is not” theme, truly a warhorse of the white critical establishment.
Way to get a-hole, Ed: You seem to be the one who can’t read…
“I never said anything about Star Trek not having a fan base. I simply used them as an example of how misguided someone can be in saying that the BNL are popular because they run a cruise.”
So your example of why “BNL runs a cruise” does not = “BNL is popular” is that Star Trek fans have cruises… but you don’t deny Star Trek’s fanbase… a fanbase means popularity… ergo… “Star trek cruise” = “Star Trek is popular”… ? Did I miss something? Or do you see some sort of difference between having a fanbase and being popular? If so, I think that’s splitting hairs. Levels of popularity are subjective.
And to Wilson, The band has never to my observation [and if they have it has been one in a thousand performances] used a Banjo on One Week. You might be thinking of Million Dollars which was performed on a banjo for about two years in the early 2000s.
I have no problem with people not liking a band. You don’t have to like Barenaked Ladies. there is no band in existance that everyone likes. I simply think it is naive for that same reason to start insulting people based on what bands they like. I don’t like nsync or britney spears, but in their day, they outsold most of the artists that I listen to. Does that make the tens of millions of people that bought their records idiots? Not to me. They just have different tastes in music.
bleh: to make your argument against this piece only about race/class says a little something about yourself, i think. you want to extract that meaning from it, then you have to own that for yourself… but you can’t put that on others and use that as a blanket statement for what bob is doing here. that’s preposterous. i mean, if we’re going to take it there, why don’t you also claim that it’s a sexual oppression thing as well?
as a woman, i would prefer that you didn’t.
so the dude doesn’t like to mix his rock ‘n’ roll with shtick and childish one-liners about underwear… he’s writing on what he thinks about a certain cultural phenomenon and that’s what people in his position are supposed to do. if you don’t agree with it, that’s fine. but you shouldn’t merely chalk it up to the white critical establishment. that’s a shortcut to thinking, much like the huge bland hits of the barenaked ones.
as for me, i think rock and funny can intermix sometimes. i was always down with tenacious d. it’s the one instance where i felt like it was funny and rock at the same time. but it’s a slippery slope, and some of you BNL fans can at least admit to that even if you don’t agree with bob using your beloved band as an example.
I’m not sure sure what’s wrong with someone making an argument about the qualities of rock and roll that they find most vital. To bring up the whole weird, reverse bias against “white rock critics” is stupid and off-topic. What Bob Hill is doing is, I would argue, valid. I would also argue, however, that he does it incredibly poorly and without nuance. He wrote a feature article about how the mixture of comedy and rock and roll is what’s bad about music these days, and he cites as his examples the Barenaked Ladies, Weird Al, Jimmy Buffett and Blink 182? Barenaked Ladies have not been relevant in any way for a decade, Weird Al is a self-admitted parody artist who hasn’t been around in forever, Jimmy Buffett is for old people with bad shorts, and Blink 182 doesn’t even exist anymore (even though when they did, they were actually played a pretty big role in the rejuvenation of the california-based pop-/skate-punk scene, which is actually very important for a lot of people.) So there all that, but there’s also the fact that he fails to mention bands like They Might Be Giants or the Violent Femmes, bands that have always been funny, but who have been so in a decidedly counter-cultural, subversive way.
Dear Confused.
Please re-read my original post. It’s less than two lines, so I am sure you can make it all the way through without stopping.
I never said anything about Star Trek not having a fan base. I simply used them as an example of how misguided someone can be in saying that the BNL are popular because they run a cruise.
But now that you bring it up, I think it is very dangerous and irresponsible for large numbers of Trekkies traveling on the same ship. Think about it…if one of those ships ever sank with all those dorks on board, none of our computers would ever work right again.
Aw son, it’s Dad.
You know better than to whip up narrow-minded articles that spur comments written by readers that show a more refined assessment of the subject that you flopped together, depthlessly.
Listen to moms – lighten up, chin up, you’ll do better next time. Love ya pal.
Of course humor and Rock and roll mix! The Beatles, Frank Zappa and the Mothers, Viv Stanshall onzo Dog Doo Da Band, The Tubes, Cheap Trick, Captain Sensible amned, Todd Rundgren, Iggy and the Stooges, The Who, Peter Gabriel, Steely Dan, The Dictators, The Dickies, Wayne/Jayne County, XTC, Flo , The Kinks, Nick Lowe, Johansen/Poindexter/New York Dolls, Squeeze, Split Enz, and many, many others have all interjected humor into their music. Bob can’t hate them all!
Am I the only one who doesn’t consider any music that is post early-Beatles pop “Rock ” Folk/Folk Pop/Folk Rock have always used sarcasm and humor as methods of scathing commentary – IMHO there’s as much merit in songs like the Fixin’ to Die Rag or most of Tom Paxton’s catalog as song’s like BNL’s “Fun ” or “Next Time.” But I wouldn’t call either of those “Rock “
Wow… could I proofread worse?
Canadian humor is an oxymoron.
I thought that the article made a valid point about the fine line between funny and silly. While I’m not taking any credit away from the artists listed, I agree with Mr. Hill that they aren’t necessarily of the “Rock N’ Roll” genre. If there was one man who was able to be both funny and rock n’ roll, my money would be on Frank Zappa. Odd how his work is always neglected on classic rock radio. Perhaps they also believe that humor does not belong in music.
P.S. New Zealand’s third most popular folk rock duo rule.
Well, this is clearly the spot to hang out on today, anyway…Eh, I feel like–nothing–about BNL. Thye are essentially harmless, therefore they are nor rock n’roll as zi understand it. Maybe they are a good party band, right? They remind me of some college boys doing a novelty act or something, I just dunno what. Maybe they will skip the cruise and do a sitcom next year…
Backspace, i’m not making an argument only about race/class, i’m simply putting this article where it belongs – into an already-stuffed folder full of critics’ musings on what is authentic Rock n’roll or not. “Rock ‘n’ roll is serious business. It’s about grit and guts, struggle and adversity. Its about making pasty rock critics spew.” Artists with huge yuppie followings (Buffet, Matthews, BNL et al) need not apply!
Oh, and back to topic: of course rock and funny can intermix. Plenty of great examples mentioned in the comments.
The bare naked ladies STINK! They deserve everything bad that is said about them. Live and let live this!
They STILL stink!
Oooo, biss ass critic has spoken! Hide the potato chips!
Bob, have you ever heard of Frank Zappa?
Everyone keeps mentioning Frank Zappa, and a load of others, which makes sense. But isn’t there a line in this article that specifically states, “There is, of course, a place for humor in rock music. But those who excel at it are more cunning and self-aware, drawn to subtext.” I’d think that effectively blankets the Frank Zappa argument, does it not?
“punks get a pass on the whole “silly” thing”
Really? WHy is that? Is it because some punk is so bad, it isn’t funny, it is just plain stupid?
Absolutely ridiculous.
You clearly don’t have the capacity to understand a Blink video. Some fools may think that a banana costume is hilarious, but as someone with a brain I can see the deeper level of humor. They are in fact, taking the piss out of anyone who actually finds that stuff funny, including themselves…
Think about it.
People who don’t like BNL are usually those who really only know them for One Week. And although I still love that song, I will admit that it was waaaaay overplayed.
They have a huge catalog and most of it doesn’t have the novelty feel of One Week.
Dylan’s a genius? Is that why he can barely sell out a local enue that seats 500 last time he came here? Is that also why half his lyrics sound like the musings of a habitual drug user? See Dewey Cox and hear his protest songs. Pretty much sums it all up.
Another thing, why are you ragging on BNL? They basically hae went underground since 1998. That and if you judge a bands creativity on freaking radio hits, you’re not going to find any substance anywhere. You could say the same thing abou the Beatles if you judged them from just hearing I want to hold your hand. Or Elvis’ Hound Dog. If you’re going to bash a band, make sure you know the facts first. Come back to me when you’ve listened to a substantial amount of catalog and I’ll respect your opinion.
follow up on two comments down… they play one week with a freakin’ banjo when they play it live (for the most part), so everyone let go of the ‘radio hit ideal’ of the band, because they are clearly much more than that, and much more than simply rock ‘n roll
Re.: “Jack Johnson—much like Dave Matthews—is talented, but he inhabits a space in music reserved for post-grad barbecues and sorority luaus.
“It’s light and it’s loose and it’s happy-hour friendly. And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. But it sure ain’t rock ‘n’ roll.”
I wasn’t aware that Jack Johnson is considered part of the rock ‘n’ roll genre. To me, Johnson’s mellow acoustic tunes fall into some other musical category only distantly related to our traditional understanding of rock music, and that’s why I feel that JJ is beyond the reach of this article’s criticism of soft rock. IMHO, that is :)
BXT: Are you for real with this?
“To me, Johnson’s mellow acoustic tunes fall into some other musical category only distantly related to our traditional understanding of rock music, and that’s why I feel that JJ is beyond the reach of this article’s criticism of soft rock. IMHO, that is :)”
You must be a big hit at post grad barbecues and sorority luaus.
It just ocurred to me that “Confused” is from Canada.
I had no idea.
Now I feel bad.
To the person that doubts Dylan’s genius because he couldn’t sellout a venue that holds 500 people-in and of itself a claim I find highly dubious-I find it loathsome and hackey (though I’ll do it anyway) to point out that Van Gogh sold one painting his entire lifetime. Gram Parsons was a commercial failure before he died. American Idol contestants sell out arenas and top the charts (their first time out at least) that doesn’t make them geniuses. It may make the corporate, soulless suits who marketed them geniuses, but they are not.
Barenaked Ladies do have one or two songs “What a Good Boy” and “Thanks That Was Fun” that I actually do enjoy and find worthy as art, but the rest of their stuff is “Hey aren’t we funny?” horseshit.
Ray Davies is also an absolute genius. In my opinion the greatest songwriter of all time. And humor/wit were huge parts of the Kinks’ cannon. However the humor was usually so dark and surrounded by such real world agony (not this woe is me emo-Dashboard Confessional-pussy-bullshit most bands sink in to) that any humor was used mainly as a balance to prevent the songs from being dragged into an abyss of dismal despair.
Dead Milkmen rule. Robert, you’ll have to hand in your “I’m a Philadelphian” card for good should you say otherwise.
They have been together for 20 years and tickets are still hard to get whenever they tour. Seems like there are others out there who like their clever lyrics just fine.
For a band that basically sucks, but in a nice harmless way, they sure seem to get a lot of airplay on the radio stations around here…why? why? What is it that radio staion managers see in them anyway? I think that Zappa would have loved to have done a few gigs with BNL. He could have sooo much fun with them…
If anything, rock needs MORE humor. Some people take themselves WAY too seriously.
…But what about 80s Hair Metal?
I didn’t realize that the Barenaked Ladies, sorry, BNL, had this many followers. I do believe that the point of the article is being lost on how awesome some people seem to think they are. They might be good musicians, but then again there are lots of crappy cover bands out there who have incredible musicians as members. The problem is that they can’t write a song to save their life, so they are forced to play other people’s music. The Barenaked Ladies should fall under the comedy genre, maybe get an HBO series, call it Plight of the BNL, something like that. Or maybe that’s been done already, only it’s actually funny. Good article, Bob!!!
you’re comparing Bob Dylan now to Van Gogh? Wow that’s a new one.
The songs that you don’t think are crap “What a Good Boy’ and “Thanks that was fun” and the songs that are included in the article makes me believe that the author only invested time into listening to a greatest hits record and thats it. Show me any artist that’s songcraft can be appreciated from a greatest hits cd and I will back down graciously. By the way, the reason behind the hokey ass radio hits songs consists of their label forcing them to make crap radio songs, like most musicians. It’s difficult for any self-respecting musician to do anything these days because music has turned into a whiny, American Idol, talentless, garbage heap.
“Show me any artist that’s songcraft can be appreciated from a greatest hits cd and I will back down graciously.”
Hot Rocks – Rolling Stones.
What about The Darkness? Just throwin’ that one out there…
this article is ridiculous all the bands listed here obviously have an amazing amount of talent ..this is why all of you people know their names.. and for someone to bash them because they have done more with their talent than you have is utterly ignorant.
I don’t think it’s bashing as much as it is using examples to make a point. It’s funny how a funny story about not being funny has caused so many people to say it’s not ok to try to be funny at the expense of the people who aren’t funny.
The trouble always starts when we try to define or classify any art to others. Everyone will have an opinion, and none of them will ever exactly match mine…
I like humor in my music.
I just draw the line between brilliant and dumb in a different spot than Bob does.
But, I do somewhat appreciate a writer who riles me up enough to visit a website I’ve not been to before just to post a comment back…So, a tip of the cap for that Bob.
wow, they deleted my original comment. how ’bout that.
Dude, Zappa was hilarious. I think rock and un-funny don’t mix, and BNL falls right in there. But Zappa pulled off kickass tunes with a lot of humor embedded straight in there.
Ween?
Spinal Tap proved rock’n'roll and funny could mix. Surely satire counts as ‘funny’ right?
Virtually every significant rock and roll artist, regardless of their popularity or talent, has used humor in their music to some degree, many use it liberally. The Beatles, Elvis, Dylan, The Who, Frank Zappa and many more have been mentioned as examples. Frank Zappa is an especially interesting choice. He is a study in extremes to say the least. Have you ever heard the overt adolescent sexual content that dominates his Overnight Sensation record? A brilliant record nonetheless but exemplifying only one of the innumerable styles he mastered in is tragically abbreviated life. Frank was one of the first musicians to make extensive use of the early digital recorder The Synclavier. He made that computer play things no living musician could, like lightning fast 88 note tuplets that existed only in his mind until technology caught up with him. Zappa could get as “poopy” as they come, while simultaneously composing and performing profound, virtuosic music. He was a genius by many measures but he never took himself too seriously to act like a kid and have good, silly fun, just for the hell of it. Laughter is good for the soul, except perhaps for curmudgeons. If you take Bob Hill seriously, you would have to conclude that Frank is a glaring example of what is (or was) wrong with rock and roll. What a preposterous premise. He posits that rock and funny don’t mix as if it was a fact rather than the opinion of (in my view) one myopic, narcissistic critic. It may be true to him and he is entitled to his opinion but that he has the gall to express it so definitively without shame or embarrassment lead me to conclude that he has serious boundary issues.. This does not make him unique among his milieu, in fact it makes him quite average and artless as a critic or reviewer. As far as BNL is concerned, I couldn’t disagree more with his statements. I have worked in the music and broadcasting industries for about 40 years and had the great luck to work with them briefly several weeks after their debut album was released. I had never heard of them when I was called upon to mix and engineer a radio show where they were interviewed and played several of their songs acoustically. As I prepared for the session by setting up mics for all of their instruments and vocals they suggested I make it simple and just set up a pair of mics and they would distance themselves to make it work. I don’t say this to brag but in the past 4 decades I’ve worked with artists of all levels of talent and success from the biggest legends to the neighborhood newbies. As understandably picky as some artists can be, none had ever made that request of me. I considered it and suggested adding a third mic for the vocalist to keep them centered and well balanced in the stereo spectrum. We agreed, I set up the mics, retreated to my control room, hit record and sat at my mixer with my jaw on the floor when I heard the fantastic sounds they created. They were comfortable, confident, casual, tight, musically skilled, entertaining, moving and yes, they were funny. It was one of the most memorable sessions of my life. On my way home from work I bought the CD and as soon as I got home I put it on the stereo as quickly as I could for my wife and me. It has remained on both of our top 5 favorite album lists ever since. Yes much of their music is heavily humor driven but there is so much more to it than that. Much of their music has a jazzy feel and complexity light years ahead of the glut of derivative 3 chord rock that manages to seep through the researched, focus grouped, consultant approved filters that control which songs and artists make it to the airwaves. It may not be for everybody, but to say it’s the problem with rock and roll today shows that Bob Hill is about as deep as a puddle, in my opinion. Before I go, let me play Bob Hill for a moment. Here’s the topic of an article I could easily believe Bob would write. Angst, fury, rage, whining, complaining and acting depressed are what is wrong with rock today. Ever since that misanthrope Curt Kobain foisted grunge music on us, the smiles, the fun, the good times and the humor have been sucked from the music by the feigned somber affect of today’s bands like dust mites are sucked from our carpets by Eureka vacuum cleaners.
O.K. discuss among yourselves and oh, by the way, it’s just called “rock” these days, not “rock and roll.” The consultants and marketing moguls decreed it thus about 15 years ago so you might want to update your buzz word file Bob. Only old people say rock and roll, you know, like the ones at the concerts by CSN, Who, Aeorsmith, Springsteen, Rolling Stones, Ray Davies, Bob Dylan, Jimmy Buffett and the rest of the clowns who ruined rock with all their silliness. I have to imagine that the many teenagers, 20, 30 and 40 somethings that compromise a good 30-40% of the audience must have been dragged along because grandpa and grandma want to go laugh, have fun and rock out with their stupid old rock and roll music rather than sit home and babysit so mom and dag can rock with their peers at a Staind, Limp Bizkit or Seven Mary Three show. Nothing funny there, just lots of good old sturm and drang. It’s like Joseph Haydn, but with a whole lot fewer notes.