Nirvana reunites with Paul McCartney in Kurt's role

[The Brain]

I won't disagree with you that first hand experience is different. For example, I saw Stockton and Malone play together lots of times, but never quite when they were at their best -- all I remember from that time is what I've gone back and re-watched, read, etc. My dad, on the other hand, went to the games, watched 'em on TV, so he remembers it differently than I do. Still, he and I can sit down and talk about the old Jazz teams for hours -- because even though I didn't live through it, I'm well-read enough to know what I'm talking about. That's really my whole argument here, Justin.

Actually, yes, you will.

The soldier will know what it was like for him, his regiment and the theatre of war he took part in and be blind to other points of view.

You will or at least can have a far more well rounded knowledge of the situations involved in the Civil War.

Eye-witnesses can be the least useful sources.

I'm not going to say one's opinion is any more or less valid because of their age but I think the point D-Man and Justin are trying to make is they have a different perspective because they lived through it. You can read all about something or even talk to others that lived through it and get all the facts but that's all you have. Just facts and statistics. You don't have the actual life experience or personal feelings and emotions. Again, I'm not saying that makes an opinion less valid you just don't have as much to form that opinion. I can read the same books and articles you can about a topic and we would get the exact same facts. However, I can tell you what it was like to be growing up during this time and you can not give me your perspective on that.

Crock, you can talk to your dad for hours about Malone and Stockton and that's great. You could have all the facts and stats memorized and be an expert on the subject. Your dad can tell you what it was like to go to those games and see them in their primes and you can imagine what it was like. Unfortunately that's all you can do is imagine. You can't absolutely know the feelings of excitement that your dad experienced. I could tell my son what how I felt watching Michael Jordan but he's not going to have the same appreciation. He'll never know what it was like to be in that building when you couldn't even hear his name announced. I could tell him how everyone used to get together to watch a Bulls game to see what MJ would do next but he won't know what it was like to actually be a part of it.

All I'm saying is people that actually lived though something have more on which they can base their opinion. It doesn't make anyone right or wrong as to how they feel about something but it's a perspective that someone that didn't live through it just simply can't have. It's easy to get defensive when someone seemingly brushes your opinion off because of your age but it would behoove you to actually take what that person is telling you into consideration. It's just another point of view like the other books and articles you have read.

 

[D-Man]

Yeah most heroin overdoses are. Do you know how they figured out he was dead?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layne_Staley#Death

Clearly he didn't just sit in a room for days or weeks on end just shooting drugs, nope he was way better then Kurt. Bullshit, they were very much the same from their music to their lifestyles.

You're mixing two different points that I made to make one of your own. So, in rebuttle to your point, one guy injected a speedball and another put a shotgun to his head. I see an accident by one guy and a suicide by the other. So, yeah...

 

[Natural Selection]

You're mixing two different points that I made to make one of your own. So, in rebuttle to your point, one guy injected a speedball and another put a shotgun to his head. I see an accident by one guy and a suicide by the other. So, yeah...

Kurt was high on heroin, he clearly wasn't in his right mind, no one really knows if he wanted to die. Hell for all we know Courtney killed him.

 

[D-Man]

Considering that the Civil War has been tirelessly studied and examined since its resolution, a modern student of the Civil War definitely knows more about the war than a soldier fighting in it. Maybe they don't know as much about it as, say, Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, or General Lee, but I'd say someone that has studied the Civil War is more well informed about the war than 99.9% of the people that lived through it.

The same can be said for almost anything, especially since the invention of the internet and file sharing where people can get access to firsthand accounts with the greatest of ease.

So this ridiculous, "You don't know as much as I do because I was there and you were not," bologna that some of the older members of the forum try to pull is just that, ridiculous.

Ugh... ok, maybe not a soldier then. But someone else who was present and lived through the fucking war. If the subject matter we were discussing was about how the soldiers felt about the war at the time, I'd rather take their word for it than someone who wrote a book about it a hundred years later.

Come on, JGlass... you're a really smart guy. I have to spell this out for you to understand? You should be able to see what I'm saying without nitpicking at my works.

Actually, yes, you will.

The soldier will know what it was like for him, his regiment and the theatre of war he took part in and be blind to other points of view.

You will or at least can have a far more well rounded knowledge of the situations involved in the Civil War.

Eye-witnesses can be the least useful sources.

Well, it depends on exactly what is being discussed, no?

I'm sure though there are of plenty people who were also around back then who vehemently disagree with your stance and would battle it out with you here if they were reading what you're saying, but of course there aren't any here that we know of to do that. But if they were here, how would you address them? This is why stooping to that level and using your seniority as knowing things others younger possibly couldn't grasp simply just doesn't work in a discussion about music or much of anything else.

Listen, I'm not saying bullshit like "I lived through the grunge era so I know everything and you know nothing." I'm saying I have a better understanding of it since I lived through it.

You guys get so damn extreme. I don't understand all the ********* about it all. What is difficult to understand? I lived during that era. I watched the news and spoke to my friends and heard their experiences that occurred during that time period. I listened to that music when it was the mainstream, cool, and hot thing to do. How can any of you put yourselves in my shoes with those points of view? It's impossible.

Now, when it comes to facts and figures and other people's published opinions, you can read about them all day. But you don't know from direct experience. So, once again, this isn't a pissing contest. It's just a fact that my experience with it is different than yours.

 

[D-Man]

Kurt was high on heroin, he clearly wasn't in his right mind, no one really knows if he wanted to die. Hell for all we know Courtney killed him.

No, we know he killed himself. Evidence proves such. Plus, he tried to kill himself twice before that. His third time was a success. I highly doubt he tried twice on his own and then had Courtney finish him off, especially when she did everything she could to prevent it from happening.

 

[Барбоса]

Technically, they both committed suicide - they both killed themselves.

Intent, however, makes the definition of their deaths different in legal terms.

 

[Natural Selection]

No, we know he killed himself. Evidence proves such. Plus, he tried to kill himself twice before that. His third time was a success. I highly doubt he tried twice on his own and then had Courtney finish him off, especially when she did everything she could to prevent it from happening.

You know she tried to hire someone to kill him once before right? You know the suicide was never investigated as anything other then a suicide right? You know he had enough heroin in his system to kill an elephant and was still able to remove the needle place it neatly in a box and back into a drawer right? You know his ashtray had cigarette butts from brands that neither he, Courtney, or any close friends smoked right? You knew that though, right?

I'm not saying he was killed, but I am saying the evidence can 'prove' either side.

 

[D-Man]

You know she tried to hire someone to kill him once before right? You know the suicide was never investigated as anything other then a suicide right? You know he had enough heroin in his system to kill an elephant and was still able to remove the needle place it neatly in a box and back into a drawer right? You know his ashtray had cigarette butts from brands that neither he, Courtney, or any close friends smoked right? You knew that though, right?

I'm not saying he was killed, but I am saying the evidence can 'prove' either side.

Honestly, I didn't know about a lot of that. Point taken.

But if she's still a suspect, I would assume they would have found out more concrete news about that by now, wouldn't they have?

 

[D-Man]

Technically, they both committed suicide - they both killed themselves.

Intent, however, makes the definition of their deaths different in legal terms.

Well, yeah, but we're only talking about the one with intent here.

 

[Барбоса]

Well, it depends on exactly what is being discussed, no?

Of course. If we are talking about the Civil War experiences of a certain Johnny Reb then you would want to ask Johnny Reb but if you wanted to know more about Sherman's March to the Sea reading books would be far better than asking Johnny Reb if he served in the west or on an ironclad.

As for living through the rise of Nirvana, it does not mean very much if the question is about their overall impact, which can only really be answered with the benefit of hindsight. Indeed, living through it could be a hindrance to answering that question.

 

[Slash-LN]

Although Nirvana was still on the rise, they clearly accomplished everything they set out to in their first two albums.

So you're leaving In Utero out of the equation? Or are you one of those people who have never heard Bleach or don't even know it existed. First two would be Bleach and Nevermind.

 

[JGlass]

Ugh... ok, maybe not a soldier then. But someone else who was present and lived through the fucking war. If the subject matter we were discussing was about how the soldiers felt about the war at the time, I'd rather take their word for it than someone who wrote a book about it a hundred years later.

Too bad the subject of this discussion isn't how D-Man felt while Nirvana was playing; the subject is whether or not Nirvana is as great a band as popular reputation holds them to be. Your feelings on Nirvana at the time they were playing has literally zero impact on that, as do my feelings on Nirvana over 20 years later. What matters is their success, their impact on the industry, and the legacy they left behind.

So I guess either way your soldier comment had zero place in this discussion.

Come on, JGlass... you're a really smart guy. I have to spell this out for you to understand? You should be able to see what I'm saying without nitpicking at my works.

I literally lol'd at this. How is disproving stupid shit you say nitpicking? You used that as an example of how first hand accounts are more valuable than dedicated study, and I proved what an asinine statement that was. Maybe if you had a leg to stand on here you'd be able to come up with a better point than, "I don't like Nirvana so that means they suck."

 

[Natural Selection]

Honestly, I didn't know about a lot of that. Point taken.

But if she's still a suspect, I would assume they would have found out more concrete news about that by now, wouldn't they have?

You know she tried to hire someone to kill him once before right? You know the suicide was never investigated as anything other then a suicide right? You know he had enough heroin in his system to kill an elephant and was still able to remove the needle place it neatly in a box and back into a drawer right? You know his ashtray had cigarette butts from brands that neither he, Courtney, or any close friends smoked right? You knew that though, right?

I'm not saying he was killed, but I am saying the evidence can 'prove' either side.

The police department has NEVER investigated it as a murder. It's only been investigated privately, but with the same evidence, as a murder.

It's a fascinating subject actually, much like Jonbenet Ramsey or JFK, because we will never truly know.

 

[D-Man]

Too bad the subject of this discussion isn't how D-Man felt while Nirvana was playing; the subject is whether or not Nirvana is as great a band as popular reputation holds them to be. Your feelings on Nirvana at the time they were playing has literally zero impact on that, as do my feelings on Nirvana over 20 years later. What matters is their success, their impact on the industry, and the legacy they left behind.

So I guess either way your soldier comment had zero place in this discussion.

No, see that's what everyone spun this conversation into. The original discussion was D-Man's opinion on Nirvana and their place in music.

That's what happens when all of you guys are so quick to be argumentative and debate on stuff that you derail topics.

I literally lol'd at this. How is disproving stupid shit you say nitpicking? You used that as an example of how first hand accounts are more valuable than dedicated study, and I proved what an asinine statement that was. Maybe if you had a leg to stand on here you'd be able to come up with a better point than, "I don't like Nirvana so that means they suck."

It's obvious that this whole thing is going to constantly get twisted in this direction when it's not what I'm saying so I'll just throw in the towel now.

(Yeah, I know... that means I'm wrong, right? Whatever combs your hair back.)

 

[D-Man]

So you're leaving In Utero out of the equation? Or are you one of those people who have never heard Bleach or don't even know it existed. First two would be Bleach and Nevermind.

Yes. Actually, those are the ones I was talking about.

 

[JGlass]

The whole Courtney Love/murder thing is a conspiracy, and while I'm not saying it has no basis in reality, it probably has just as much foundation as the moon landing conspiracy or loose change, i.e. a few things that don't seem right at first but make more sense with a little critical thinking or investigation.

Still, I don't see why suicide is seen as worse than OD'ing on heroin. You're killing yourself either way.

 

[D-Man]

The whole Courtney Love/murder thing is a conspiracy, and while I'm not saying it has no basis in reality, it probably has just as much foundation as the moon landing conspiracy or loose change, i.e. a few things that don't seem right at first but make more sense with a little critical thinking or investigation.

Still, I don't see why suicide is seen as worse than OD'ing on heroin. You're killing yourself either way.

You're absolutely right but Barbosa already hit the nail on the head with this. It's about intent.

 

[JGlass]

No, see that's what everyone spun this conversation into. The original discussion was D-Man's opinion on Nirvana and their place in music.

You came in here, guns blazing, with "First of all Nirvana SUCKS." If that's not an invitation to discuss the musical merits of Nirvana, I don't know what is.

That's what happens when all of you guys are so quick to be argumentative and debate on stuff that you derail topics.

You're kidding me, right? The topic of this thread was supposed to be the merits of Paul McCartney playing with Grohl and Novoselic, and then you changed the conversation to, depending who you ask, "D-Man's opinion on Nirvana/Nirvana's importance in musical history." And you're blaming "us" for derailing the topic? Give me a break.

It's obvious that this whole thing is going to constantly get twisted in this direction when it's not what I'm saying so I'll just throw in the towel now.

(Yeah, I know... that means I'm wrong, right? Whatever combs your hair back.)

I'm not going to bite.

 

[Slash-LN]

Yes. Actually, those are the ones I was talking about.

Well from a musical standpoint Kurt had said that In Utero was the closest to what he wanted an album to be. So in that stance it took three albums to accomplish what at least Kurt wanted to do.
I get what you're saying though.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

So, it seems Cobain/Nirvana still draws eh?

Or that all the Nirvana related arguments haven't been done in a long time.

 

[Natural Selection]

So, it seems Cobain/Nirvana still draws eh?

Or that all the Nirvana related arguments haven't been done in a long time.

Yes and yes.

 

[Slyfox696]

Lots of debate since the last time I visited this thread, and I don't feel like reading it all.


Have we all come to the conclusion that Nirvana is overrated yet?

 

[D-Man]

Lots of debate since the last time I visited this thread, and I don't feel like reading it all.


Have we all come to the conclusion that Nirvana is overrated yet?

Here's a recap:

Me: Nirvana is overrated and he sucks.
Everyone Else: FUCK YOU FUCK YOU AAAHHHHHH FUCK YOU FUCK YOU

Pretty much.

 

[Danger Burger]

Seems like a pretty cool idea to have Paul McCartney playing with some of the Nirvana guys.

And for charity too!

 

[Slyfox696]

Here's a recap:

Me: Nirvana is overrated and he sucks.
Everyone Else: FUCK YOU FUCK YOU AAAHHHHHH FUCK YOU FUCK YOU

Pretty much.

I'll stand with you. At least about Nirvana being overrated. But I will say Nirvana is better than Nickelback. Hell, me farting in the shower is better than Nickelback. Of course, that's a little unfair, me farting in the shower is better than most popular music these days.







Sorry I had to needle you, D-Man. I just had to join in with everyone else and I didn't feel like saying "FUCK YOU FUCK YOU AAAHHHHHH FUCK YOU FUCK YOU". You know what a **** I am for conformity on Internet message boards.