What band would you say puts forth the most completely hopeless view of life (possibly, also, which band was most successful at it)?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I am going to go with Pink Floyd.

― Scaredy Cat, Saturday, 8 February 2003 20:59 (twenty-three years ago)

nu-metal bands (Limp Bizkit, ICP etc) fill me with anxiety and dread for the future. absolutely bleak.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:03 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, you're right about that. I never even considered them because I think about them so very little, but they are damn successful and their messages are certainly not very life affirming.

― Scaredy Cat, Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:05 (twenty-three years ago)

You haven't listened to any Pink Floyd from before _Dark Side of the Moon_, have you Scaredy?

There are many who try to make careers out of it, but since few of 'em (aside from some notable exceptions) don't off themselves in an effort to show that they mean it, man.

Though Nirvana certainly could fit in this category, i suppose.

-Matt, who shouldn't take the bait.

― Matt Maxwell (Matt M.), Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:06 (twenty-three years ago)

juvenile.

― jess (dubplatestyle), Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:07 (twenty-three years ago)

usually a band has an easier job making themselves seem hopeless rather than the world. I always wonder why nihilists or heavy duty pessimists would bother starting bands. Seems rather pointless.

That said, when I listen to Radiohead's Kid A on headphones walking around town I get really paranoid. So if making me wonder if the hand of God is gonna snap me up and eat me (a la David Cross's post-Harlow hangover on "SUYFB!") or if I'm gonna get attacked counts, then that one would win.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:07 (twenty-three years ago)

I have a lot of Pink Floyd but I don't really know the timeline. I think Meddle, Piper, Obscured by Clouds, More and Animals were all before Dark Side, right? I don't have The Wall or that other Roger Waters opus he put out before quitting. They just bum me out too much.

Did you find this pre-Dark Side material uplifting?

― Scaredy Cat, Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:10 (twenty-three years ago)

I STILL HAVE NOT REALLY HEARD KID A! Hard to believe, I know. Yet, I've heard the new Interpol for some reason.

― Scaredy Cat, Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:13 (twenty-three years ago)

Flipper

― Michael B, Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:20 (twenty-three years ago)

most hopeless = Jandek
most successful = Linkin Park, apparently

― Curtis Stephens, Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:22 (twenty-three years ago)

Swans.

― Andrew L (Andrew L), Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:25 (twenty-three years ago)

Tha G Code is more hopeless than anything Floyd ever did.

― Adam A. (Keiko), Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:32 (twenty-three years ago)

Swans are a good choice, but there is some icy beauty in their work that at least suggests an appreciation for something.

I'm more inclined to suggest some myopic gaggle of meatnecked jarheads like Korn, who can't see beyond their own petty problems.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:32 (twenty-three years ago)

I obviously worded my question wrong. Jandek and Swans are perfect answers. Perfect. They are both way more successful at hopelessness than Pink Floyd. Definitely. And Flipper too!

I suppose I meant to ask as the follow up questions "of these hopeless bands, which was the biggest commercial success", so it success measured in two ways: most successfully hopeless as well as most successfully successful.

Stupid me, I've ruined the thread. I'd

― Scaredy Cat, Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:35 (twenty-three years ago)

andrew OTM. esp the early stuff.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:36 (twenty-three years ago)

Basically, this is an impossible question, I guess.

― Scaredy Cat, Saturday, 8 February 2003 21:37 (twenty-three years ago)

Swans, all the way... but in particular M. Gira's solo recordings. Check out "The Solimquist."

― maria b (maria b), Saturday, 8 February 2003 22:15 (twenty-three years ago)

I misspelled it just thinking about its hopelessness. :)

― maria b (maria b), Saturday, 8 February 2003 22:18 (twenty-three years ago)

Joy Division, Ministry, Swans, Birthday Party..

― Hayden (Hayden), Saturday, 8 February 2003 22:23 (twenty-three years ago)

Roger Waters usually injects some hopeful bit in somewhere ("Pigs on the Wing", "Outside the Wall", "The Tide Is Turning", etc.), though it's a bit hard to find on The Final Cut -- perhaps there's a bit in the title track.

Jandek is definitely the answer, I think -- mostly towards the beginning (Ready For the House) and most recent part (I Threw You Away) of his career, as there are some lighter moments partway through (on Lost Cause, for one, and the electric albums like Telegraph Melts don't seem too hopeless to me). The sheer concentration of hopelessness in every aspect of those albums outstrips anything else I've heard (though Low's Songs for a Dead Pilot comes close: I wonder if that album was at all inspired by Jandek?).

― Phil (phil), Saturday, 8 February 2003 23:47 (twenty-three years ago)

Possibly so! Low contributed to the Jandek tribute album a couple of years back, so...

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 9 February 2003 00:54 (twenty-three years ago)

David Sneddon without a shadow of a doubt. That shit is DARK. He's a massive Sonic Youth fan, apparently.

― chris sallis, Sunday, 9 February 2003 01:39 (twenty-three years ago)

this is easy - Hey Jude.

― James Blount (James Blount), Sunday, 9 February 2003 01:43 (twenty-three years ago)

Circle X.

― Douglas (Douglas), Sunday, 9 February 2003 01:48 (twenty-three years ago)

bluetones

― naked as sin (naked as sin), Sunday, 9 February 2003 01:51 (twenty-three years ago)

Jive Bunny

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Sunday, 9 February 2003 01:54 (twenty-three years ago)

I would have to say Eyehategod.5 cd's worth of utter misery.

― Scott Seward, Sunday, 9 February 2003 04:36 (twenty-three years ago)

Does it get any more bleaker than GYBE?

― Brenya, Sunday, 9 February 2003 05:47 (twenty-three years ago)

Perhaps the TV Personalities in the years leading up to Dan's going AWOL.

― Amateurist (amateurist), Sunday, 9 February 2003 07:32 (twenty-three years ago)

Christian Death. What a bunch of miserably grouchy whiners. *Both* versions of the band.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Monday, 10 February 2003 02:07 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, but they (Christian Death) had a sense of humour, which cancels out a significant portion of their bleakness and also suggests that they just might not take their own music/message that seriously.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 10 February 2003 03:37 (twenty-three years ago)

Did anyone mention the American Music Club/Mark Eitzel? Or maybe the Pernice machine. Not in the blood-guts hardcore death way, just more the every-song's-about-suicide kinda way.

― dub you well (wl), Monday, 10 February 2003 04:25 (twenty-three years ago)

The Chronic, obv.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 10 February 2003 04:26 (twenty-three years ago)

Comus

― Joe (Joe), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 01:49 (twenty-three years ago)

To be honest, I don't think it gets much bleaker than Nick Drake - you get northern sky and saturday sun for a bit of cheeriness, but essentially, it's none-more-black. Come on, argue with me!

― Johnney B (Johnney B), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 13:51 (twenty-three years ago)

I don't know about particular bands or whatnot, but god-dang that UNKLE song with Richard Ashcroft syphons all hope out of me...at least until the closing part with the strings where it shifts into uplifting major key, and suddenly all is right with the world.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 14:45 (twenty-three years ago)

re: Pink Floyd

_Animals_ is two albums after _Dark Side_, and is kinda the start of Waters full-blow depression being splattered all over the music. I really like everything that came out pre _Dark Side_ (and even _Dark Side_ and _Wish You Were Here_) and find it far from depressing. Uplifting, perhaps not, but certainly not much of a downer.

― Matt Maxwell (Matt M.), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 16:24 (twenty-three years ago)

Why The Birthday Party? They are who I put on when I need a good cheer up. However, it was proposed over the weekend that members of both the Swans & TBP "need a hug." So it's not just you.

Hmmm...most completely hopeless. DEVO is not a downer, but never any hope for anything.

― Fivvy, Tuesday, 11 February 2003 19:44 (twenty-three years ago)

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:21 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, but they (Christian Death) had a sense of humour...
I suspect at least 80% of their humor was unintentional.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:28 (twenty-three years ago)

Shania Twain. Her entire career and output convey the idea that human life is an empty, emotionless machine to be exploited, used-up, and cynically paraded about. Can't think of anything more hopeless than that.
Wellll...the rockists think that of all pure pop. To a rockist pleasure is something that must be earned.
Are they right?

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:30 (twenty-three years ago)

"Wellll...the rockists think that of all pure pop. To a rockist pleasure is something that must be earned."

Don't put me in your little box. What does pleasure have to do with anything I said? Defining pop as innately pleasurable seems highly suspect to me, arbitrary even.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:39 (twenty-three years ago)

"don't put me in your little box"

shania twain fans to thread

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:43 (twenty-three years ago)

Don't put me in your little box.
*custos tries vainly to shove Shakeys head down with one hand while the tries to tape the box shut with the other*
What does pleasure have to do with anything I said?
Actually, I was being (overly?) general about pop. Pop does seem to have more of an interest in fun. Rock (claims) to be "serious".

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:46 (twenty-three years ago)

Rock (claims) to be "serious".

whoa boy, there's a whole can o' worms.

*slinks off to think about the Dictators or the Ramones*

― hstencil, Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:47 (twenty-three years ago)

to worms: GET...BACK...IN...THAT...CAN...
Shit. We might as well invoke the word influence while we're at it.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:49 (twenty-three years ago)

Shania, and pop (hey let's generalize! Why not!) conveys the illusion of fun in order to obscure its rather frightening and cynical seriousness.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:54 (twenty-three years ago)

No concealment. Don't try to run! Love can be fun!

― Amateurist (amateurist), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:55 (twenty-three years ago)

Hmmm. Interesting theory, Shakey.
But grim though.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:57 (twenty-three years ago)

this was no more an interesting theory in 1920, 50, 70, or 2000

― jess (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 20:58 (twenty-three years ago)

Well, then, jess...how would you modify the theory to make it closer to the truth/more insightful/more specific/clearer, etc?

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 21:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I can't say I'm the first to propose it (*ahem* Society of the Spectacle *cough*), and really it just boils down to the old authenticity debate. And whenever the inevitable conclusion is reached that authenticity cannot be located or affirmed, I remind myself of Philip Dick's ruler for distinguishing authentic humans from mechanical reproductions: emotional empathy.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 11 February 2003 21:04 (twenty-three years ago)

But how does one detect emotional empathy?

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 21:07 (twenty-three years ago)

Excuse: But how does one detect *genuine* emotional empathy?

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 21:08 (twenty-three years ago)

Haven't you seen Bladerunner? You pose a bunch of hypothetical situations and there's this machine that scans retinal activ - oh nevermind.

Seriously, I would suggest that the more empathetic towards other people you are yourself, the better equipped you are to identify said empathy in others.

So let's look at Shania. Does her career/persona convey empathy for her fans, or even for people in general? Taken in conjunction with an analysis of her actual musical products (the results of mass-marketed consumer-capitalist modes of production) and the social costs involved therein, I think it's logical to conclude that there is a minimum of empathy involved in the music of Shania Twain, and that the worldview she reinforces is completely hopeless, empty, and bleak - one of emotionless exploitation. Which is in many ways *more* dire than the worldview conveyed by someone like, say, Jandemk - insofar as his mere existence as a productive musician actually implies that it's *worthwhile* to attempt emotional connections through music, to relate something of personal significance to an audience.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 11 February 2003 21:26 (twenty-three years ago)

An even more hopeless view of life = Jess trying to talk sense on the internet to ppl named 'Lord Custos Epsilon' and 'Shakey Mo Collier'

― Andrew L (Andrew L), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 22:09 (twenty-three years ago)

her actual musical products (the results of mass-marketed consumer-capitalist modes of production)

Shakey has it occured to you that everything in the world after 1900 or so can be called a result of "mass-marketed consumer-capitalist modes of production" insofar as I can parse that phrase?

Mozart was worse (in yr. intentionality schema) I think cause he was just writing trash to please a decadant royalty.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 11 February 2003 22:18 (twenty-three years ago)

"Shakey has it occured to you that everything in the world after 1900 or so can be called a result of "mass-marketed consumer-capitalist modes of production" insofar as I can parse that phrase?"

That's ridiculous - not everything is mass-marketed and you know it, and the degree to which things are manufactured for a consumer-capitalist market varies widely (ex: unique hand-made book vs. assembly-line auto).

Is "parse" the new "influence"?

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 11 February 2003 22:21 (twenty-three years ago)

andrew this is why i don't understand why people ask me why i just make smartass quips these days!

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 12 February 2003 01:19 (twenty-three years ago)

more smart, less ass please.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 12 February 2003 01:23 (twenty-three years ago)

b-b-but without his ass, jess is nothing!

note: may not be true

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Wednesday, 12 February 2003 01:58 (twenty-three years ago)

sorry shakey, i'll try to drop more of the hoary false-truisms that everyone around here seems to regard as major insights these days

keep pushing back those frontiers people!

― jess (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 12 February 2003 03:14 (twenty-three years ago)

"Shakey has it occured to you that everything in the world after 1900 or so can be called a result of "mass-marketed
consumer-capitalist modes of production" insofar as I can parse that phrase?"
That's ridiculous - not everything is mass-marketed and you know it, and the degree to which things are manufactured
for a consumer-capitalist market varies widely (ex: unique hand-made book vs. assembly-line auto).

Is "parse" the new "influence"?

Okay. Obviously you meant to say something different than what you actually did. You meant to say "is produced for many people to buy" and instead you said "is the result of mass-market consumer-capitalist modes of production".

The capitalist mode of production, which includes producing things for a mass market of consumers, dominates the earth right now and pretty much everything is a "result" of it if only indirectly, get it?

And why I said "parse" is that "mass market" and "consumer" aren't about modes of production, but consumption and distribution and the term "consumer-capitalist" seems pretty much meaningless except maybe to describe someone who consumes capitalists or a world full of consumers who are ALSO capitalists, both of which seem pretty odd things to be talking about.

You see what happens when you try to use big words to sound better than Shania? You come out sounding real stupid.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 12 February 2003 03:56 (twenty-three years ago)

ah, semantics. Why is it that so many ILM discussions get derailed by this idiotic hair-splitting? You complain about how I phrased something rather than counter my point.

"mass market" and "consumer" aren't about modes of production"

Once again, you are just wrong. You can't have a mass-market without capitalism. And the concept of a consumer (as opposed to "peasant", or "slave", or "merchant") is distinctly capitalist and does not really exist prior to the 20th century.

""consumer-capitalist" seems pretty much meaningless except maybe to describe someone who consumes capitalists or a world full of consumers who are ALSO capitalists, both of which seem pretty odd things to be talking about."

The phrase "consumer-capitalist" here is being used to modify the term "market". It is not a noun, as you interpret it for no apparent reason. It means that the market is one in which consumers and capitalists interact, get it?

"You see what happens when you try to use big words to sound better than Shania? You come out sounding real stupid. "

Here's some small words for you: FUCK OFF AND LEARN TO READ.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 12 February 2003 17:20 (twenty-three years ago)

http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~dmirman/gradschoolhell/test.gif

― gygax!, Wednesday, 12 February 2003 17:26 (twenty-three years ago)

Why is it that so many ILM discussions get derailed by this idiotic hair-splitting?

Because we've no recourse to parsing body language, hand gestures, and tone of voice.

― Amateurist (amateurist), Wednesday, 12 February 2003 17:31 (twenty-three years ago)

one year passes...

ha that picture above is so OTM it hurts!

anyway--since another semester of grad school is starting, what's the best Eyehategod album?

― ryan (ryan), Saturday, 21 August 2004 00:44 (twenty-one years ago)

'Dopesick'

― dave q, Saturday, 21 August 2004 00:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Mer-Da's "Long Burn the Fire" is way hopeless...

― eddie hurt (ddduncan), Saturday, 21 August 2004 01:09 (twenty-one years ago)

Blur. He doesn't like suits, he doesn't like trains, he doesn't like houses in the country, he doesn't like Elastica, he doesn't like America, he doesn't like video games, he doesn't like parties, he doesn't like bureaucrats, he doesn't like being bored, he doesn't like offices, he doesn't like formality, he doesn't like three of his own albums, he doesn't like Wife Swap, he doesn't like normality, he doesn't like abnormality, he doesn't like fast food, he doesn't like bankers, he doesn't like EMI, he doesn't like caravans. Fuck.

― Sexual Air Supply (Autumn Almanac), Saturday, 21 August 2004 02:23 (twenty-one years ago)

THE THE

― Gear! (Gear!), Saturday, 21 August 2004 02:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Codeine, I say.

― Ian c=====8 (orion), Saturday, 21 August 2004 06:46 (twenty-one years ago)

dakota suite

― purple patch (electricsound), Saturday, 21 August 2004 06:58 (twenty-one years ago)

Radiohead jumped to mind on seeing the thread title.
I don't really like them.

― Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Saturday, 21 August 2004 08:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Beyonce.

― Russell Dixon (Skinny), Saturday, 21 August 2004 08:31 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.