Spin, I love you man, and we’re suffering together here. We grew up together, ya know? Back in the 80’s, we started really listening to music. You were like the big brother I never had: a few years older, wiser, there to turn me on to what life was going to be like in high school, in college, in that really cool Slacker-meets-Singles experiment that my adult life was supposed to become.
We knew we had one up on Rolling Stone. Man, they just didn’t get it. For them, anything new was just a reflection of the past. If it was trippy it sounded “like a modern Pink Floyd” if it was heavy it was “a new faster Zeppelin” if it was poppy, “it’s further proof of the influence of The Beatles.” Jane’s Addiction reviews were like The Blind Men And The Elephant. But me and you, Spin, we were free, we saw the Now for what it was, then.
And we still want to be cool, we still feel cool, but we just can’t deny that we can’t keep track of the kidz these days. But still, did it have to come to this: (?)
I’ll be the first to admit that it’s true. The similarities are there. When I first saw the ‘Fire they were running fast and furious down a geeked-out E-Street. I felt the same way about the Hold Steady (quoted on page 66, ‘natch.) But do you have to pull a Rolling Stone? Do you have to publish Little Steven Van Zandt’s quotes (page 68) about new bands and their ignorance of their roots?
Did you have to write 5 pages on why emo singers sound like crap and will never be like the old good-old-boys (even if you got Chris “Dashboard” Carrabba to dis his own fan’s blank stare at the mention of Ian MacKaye?) (Page 99.)
I’m not saying you’re wrong, by the way. Not at all. I’m just saying that you’re making me feel old.
