Nirvana reunites with Paul McCartney in Kurt's role

Because the lyrics are pure poetry, D-Man, pure poetry. Just check this out:

"Rape me
Rape me, my friend
Rape me
Rape me again"

How can you argue with such thought provoking, introspective and pure poetic lyrics?

Do you even know what that song is about?
 
Yes. Why does it matter?

Because a lot of people who bring up that song have no idea what the meaning behind is.

You said it isn't introspective but it is introspective in the way that Kurt was feeling towards the media at the time.
 
Because a lot of people who bring up that song have no idea what the meaning behind is.

You said it isn't introspective but it is introspective in the way that Kurt was feeling towards the media at the time.
Except that's not what the song is about. The song is about so-called woman's power/anti-rape song.
 
Except that's not what the song is about. The song is about a so-called woman's power/anti-rape song.
I don't know where you heard that but it's been widely known that it was Kurt's shot at the media intruding on his life and how he hated fame.

The line "I'm not the only one" was him stating that there were other bands in the "scene" and he felt the media should give them more attention.
 
I don't know where you heard that but it's been widely known that it was Kurt's shot at the media intruding on his life and how he hated fame.

The line "I'm not the only one" was him stating that there were other bands in the "scene" and he felt the media should give them more attention.

Hmm, well, I've known it for a while, but would quotes from Cobain himself satisfy you?

Wikipedia said:
Kurt Cobain conceived "Rape Me" as a life-affirming anti-rape song. He told Spin, "It's like she's saying, 'Rape me, go ahead, rape me, beat me. You'll never kill me. I'll survive this and I'm gonna fucking rape you one of these days and you won't even know it.'"[7]

Nirvana biographer Michael Azerrad stated that "Rape Me" seemed to deal with Cobain's distaste of the media's coverage on his personal life. While Cobain said the song was written long before his troubles with drug addiction became public, he agreed that the song could be viewed in that light.[8]
 
I don't know where you heard that but it's been widely known that it was Kurt's shot at the media intruding on his life and how he hated fame.

The line "I'm not the only one" was him stating that there were other bands in the "scene" and he felt the media should give them more attention.

Because Cobain himself once said in a interview with Spin, that it's a life-affirming anti-rape song:shrug:
 
That's the first time I have ever heard or read that. Every book I have ever read has said it was about the media stuff.

Every book you have ever read has been wrong then, kinda makes you wonder what else they got wrong if they couldn't even get that right huh?
 
That's the first time I have ever heard or read that. Every book I have ever read has said it was about the media stuff.

Don't believe everything you read, kid. I've read books stating Eddie Vedder is a coke fiend, or that Yoko Ono was the best thing to happen to John Lennon and his career and his family.
 
I like Nirvana. Not as much as Pearl Jam or Alice in Chains but I like them. I'm also a fan of the Beatles and the McCartney-Lenon duo is one of the best song writing pairs in rock music.

But coming even as a fan I have to go 'buwuh?' I realize it's just a thing for shits and giggles but when I think of Nirvana possibly getting back together for a one off gig, the first singer to come to mind to replace Kurt Cobain is not Paul McCartney.
 
That's the first time I have ever heard or read that.
That doesn't make it any less correct. :shrug:

Every book I have ever read has said it was about the media stuff.
Probably because most of the books you have read about it were kissing Nirvana's ass, or appealing to fans who like to kiss Nirvana's ass.

See, your post here is exactly why so many people consider Nirvana overrated. Cobain himself came out and specified what the song is about, and yet, Nirvana fans, who are so intent on putting Nirvana on a pedestal to which they don't belong, ignore Cobain's own words in order to justify their view of Nirvana as being so wonderful and "poetic".

It's not that deep, and it's really not that good of a song. And yet, you've been misinformed as to the meaning of the song, most likely because the alternate (read: made up) meaning of the song makes it seem "deeper" and more "introspective".

And that's why so many people call Nirvana overrated. Nirvana had some good songs, some songs that I even enjoy listening to today, but they were not as great as the Nirvana blowhards like to pretend they are. Which is what makes them overrated.
 
I like Nirvana. Not as much as Pearl Jam or Alice in Chains but I like them. I'm also a fan of the Beatles and the McCartney-Lenon duo is one of the best song writing pairs in rock music.

But coming even as a fan I have to go 'buwuh?' I realize it's just a thing for shits and giggles but when I think of Nirvana possibly getting back together for a one off gig, the first singer to come to mind to replace Kurt Cobain is not Paul McCartney.

According to Fuse Eddie did a song with Roger Waters. I didn't see it though.
 
I have no problem with the charity part.
I just don't feel like Paul is a logical choice.
It seems like I'm not alone.

Again,

It's for charity and you're complaining about it. If you're not complaining about it, don't bother replying as I don't particularly care.
 
That doesn't make it any less correct. :shrug:


Probably because most of the books you have read about it were kissing Nirvana's ass, or appealing to fans who like to kiss Nirvana's ass.

See, your post here is exactly why so many people consider Nirvana overrated. Cobain himself came out and specified what the song is about, and yet, Nirvana fans, who are so intent on putting Nirvana on a pedestal to which they don't belong, ignore Cobain's own words in order to justify their view of Nirvana as being so wonderful and "poetic".

It's not that deep, and it's really not that good of a song. And yet, you've been misinformed as to the meaning of the song, most likely because the alternate (read: made up) meaning of the song makes it seem "deeper" and more "introspective".

And that's why so many people call Nirvana overrated. Nirvana had some good songs, some songs that I even enjoy listening to today, but they were not as great as the Nirvana blowhards like to pretend they are. Which is what makes them overrated.
Even it being anti rape doesn't mean it doesn't have meaning. Are you pro rape?

Nirvana is my favorite band but that doesn't mean I ever said they are the best band of all time.
I can actually admit that if Kurt hadn't killed himself they wouldn't have the iconic standing they have now. I also never said Kurt was poetic. To act like none of his lyrics have meaning though is to be close minded.

I myself find the Beatles to be the most overrated band ever and most Beatles fans are too hard headed to accept my stance on that.
 
Even it being anti rape doesn't mean it doesn't have meaning. Are you pro rape?

Nirvana is my favorite band but that doesn't mean I ever said they are the best band of all time.
I can actually admit that if Kurt hadn't killed himself they wouldn't have the iconic standing they have now. I also never said Kurt was poetic. To act like none of his lyrics have meaning though is to be close minded.

I myself find the Beatles to be the most overrated band ever and most Beatles fans are too hard headed to accept my stance on that.

Irony - 1
Slash-LN - 0
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,837
Messages
3,300,747
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top