Music's deadliest genre

It reminds me that phrase from The Sex Pistols - Die Young and Stay Pretty! and I Want To Die Before I Get Old from The Who in My Generation...

The "Low Life In The Fast Lane" it seems to grow up in nowadays, isn't it? It will be a miracle to reach at the age of Joe Morello, in the present.
 
I don't buy the tortured artist stereotype. There are plenty of incredibly creative, productive artists with stable, mature personalities who provide us with decades of work. You just don't hear about them as much because the screw-ups get all of the attention for their "interesting personalities."

Dying of a drug overdose is a disgrace.

This leads to another issue I have as well: We, as consumers, celebrate the unique and weird. Perhaps because we don't have the courage to be Lady Gaga or musically experimental like Frank Zappa. So as consumers of entertainment, we only raise an eyebrow when it's so unique it's obvious there is no one like who we just discovered. Then this artist feels the pressure to be more and more unique, which, depending on the individual can either lead to destruction, or in the case of U2's Edge, buying Malibu real estate in California.

Why should we buy into bands that sound like Rush, when we can have Rush? Or Devo, or Lawrence Welk, or ______ (name your favorite unique artist)? We don't want copies, we want the real deal. So these artists can't cope with always being unique over time? Remember the funny scene in "This is Spinal Tap" when the bass player (Harry Shearer) really just wanted to play jazz? The problem could very well be these artists taking themselves so seriously that it leads to mind alteration.
 
Moroseness, negativity, violence, destruction, self-destruction, self-absorption, indulgence, alienation. That's not an all-inclusive list.

Some may have produced dark art but if that was the pattern I would have noticed. It's not that cut-and-dried.

What about Keith Richards? Remarkable quantities of input and remarkably upbeat output.

Or Duane Allman (died in a crash but was a very heavy user). John Bonham. Tim Buckley. Bon Scott. Rick Grech. The list could go on ... none fit your description.
 
Some may have produced dark art but if that was the pattern I would have noticed. It's not that cut-and-dried.

What about Keith Richards? Remarkable quantities of input and remarkably upbeat output.

Or Duane Allman (died in a crash but was a very heavy user). John Bonham. Tim Buckley. Bon Scott. Rick Grech. The list could go on ... none fit your description.

Well, I think DMC was referring to the song writers, but a few of these don't seem that far out from his point:

Richards, OK, but doesn't Mick write the lyrics? Still, Paint it Black, Sympathy for the Devil,

Duane Allman - Whipping Post? TIED to the whipping post! Good Lord, I feel like I'm dyin'... Granted Greg wrote the song. But seems to fit.

Bonham - Gallows Pole, Immigrant Song ( violence, destruction), When the Leave Breaks (Moroseness, alienation).

Bon Scott: Dirty Deeds, Jail Break, Highway to Hell,
 
Well, I think DMC was referring to the song writers, but a few of these don't seem that far out from his point:

Richards, OK, but doesn't Mick write the lyrics? Still, Paint it Black, Sympathy for the Devil,

Duane Allman - Whipping Post? TIED to the whipping post! Good Lord, I feel like I'm dyin'... Granted Greg wrote the song. But seems to fit.

Bonham - Gallows Pole, Immigrant Song ( violence, destruction), When the Leave Breaks (Moroseness, alienation).

Bon Scott: Dirty Deeds, Jail Break, Highway to Hell,

LOL. I'm up to your tricks, young Ian :)

Keef: Happy (and he wrote it), Brown Sugar, Can't You Hear Me Knocking, Beast of Burden, Start Me Up ... (I won't mention Sister Morphine - ahem :) ... just reflecting the many sided nature of human existence.

The Allmans weren't known to be dark, unless we're going to say that all blues artists are dark ... but isn't that what blues is about - an acknowledgment that life isn't all Wake Me Up Before You Go Go? Jessica was a pretty happy little tune. As for Whipping Post:

I've been run down
I've been lied to
And I don't know why I let that mean woman make me a fool
She took all my money, wrecked my new car
Now she's with one of my good time buddies, they're drinkin' in some cross town bar


You can't blame Gruntin' Gregg and his bro' for having the blues there, can you? I mean, hey, I'd be mightily peeved if my ex wrecked my new car too.

Bonzo - Too many upbeat Zep songs to mention. He migtn't have written them but he was hardly casting a shadow of his dark, alcohol-tormented soul over them, was he? Nope, he just rocked out like a beast. He liked his booze and got addicted. Hardly Robinson Crusoe there.

Bon - forever grinning and leering with wicked joy. He was just a madrat. I knew a bunch of guys of that ilk in my mad, bad younger days. If anything, their self abuse was a show of macho bravado ... that "Hey, I'm man enough to handle it! Are you?" game. Young men taking risks with life and limb to show off to their mates is hardly rare. Idiotic, yes. Hubris? Sure. Dark? Nope.
 
Some may have produced dark art but if that was the pattern I would have noticed. It's not that cut-and-dried.

What about Keith Richards? Remarkable quantities of input and remarkably upbeat output.

Or Duane Allman (died in a crash but was a very heavy user). John Bonham. Tim Buckley. Bon Scott. Rick Grech. The list could go on ... none fit your description.

Of course it's not an all-inclusive list - I said as much in the post. I neglected to mention there are plenty of exceptions. Also, self-destructive tortured artist types need not have a baleful streak. John Bonham, Bon Scott and others who choked on their vomit, overdosed, fell out of windows or died in other comically tragic ways all fit my description of brilliant artists who have some combination of stupidity/weakness/gluttony/etc. that kills them young.
 
Also, self-destructive tortured artist types

DMC, one of my points is they need not be tortured. Sometimes they are simply not interested in living a quiet life into a ripe old age. It's their call. There are many ways to live a life. Was John Bonham's approach worse than spending a life in an unhappy marriage in quiet suburban angst before ending up stuck in a nursing home with dementia?

It's a fact of life that not everyone gets their act together and they pay the price either through having a short life or a problematic long life. Some are damaged. Some are foolish. Some are just hedonistic and pay the ultimate price for reckless behaviour that many others get away with, ie. sometimes it just depends on how the cards fall. Some have mental issues.

At times reckless personality traits can be inseparable from an artist's breaking of boundaries in their creative pursuits. There are plenty of bipolar people who refuse to take lithium because it robs them of their creativity, and bipolar people are well represented amongst high achievers in the arts through their brilliance during their manic phases.

Other great artists are more capable of separating their personal life and creative work. Good for them - they have it all. Some people really do have it all. Lucky them!

I'm not inclined to judge. As I said, there are lots of ways to live a life and we rarely know the full story behind people's issues, just snippets the journalists give us. Some people who appear to be throwing away the keys to the kingdom were irretrievably damaged in early life and were never going to get it together.
 
Negativity is often used as inspiration for music...then music helps to move above that negativity.

Think of the blues and jazz....created by people who lived in poverty...often very sad lives.

It is not just grunge, rap, rock 'n roll and the multiple subgenres of metal that are known for the doom and gloom associated with their music and musicians.

To quote Lisa from The Simpsons:

"I'm going to be a famous jazz musician. I've got it all figured out. I'll be unappreciated in my own country, but my gutsy blues stylings will electrify the French. I'll avoid the horrors of drug abuse, but I do plan to have several torrid love affairs, and I may or may not die young. I haven't decided."

Good musicians tend to belong to a range of strange personalities.
 
I'm not sure if musicians are necessarily the ones who are naturally unstable, although Bo
Eder's two posts are good thoughts.

It's also very possible that generally some people are just less stable than others (or not interested
in a "stable life", BUT according to the circumstances of the ones who lead a normal life with
every day job, maybe family, children etc, they either can't afford or don't dare drifting away that much.
Whereas those with unstable tendencies who become musicians can really live out their
tendencies for chaos, instability or non-binding nature. Their job even kind of asks for at
times.
 
DMC, one of my points is they need not be tortured. Sometimes they are simply not interested in living a quiet life into a ripe old age. It's their call. There are many ways to live a life. Was John Bonham's approach worse than spending a life in an unhappy marriage in quiet suburban angst before ending up stuck in a nursing home with dementia?

It's a fact of life that not everyone gets their act together and they pay the price either through having a short life or a problematic long life. Some are damaged. Some are foolish. Some are just hedonistic and pay the ultimate price for reckless behaviour that many others get away with, ie. sometimes it just depends on how the cards fall. Some have mental issues.

At times reckless personality traits can be inseparable from an artist's breaking of boundaries in their creative pursuits. There are plenty of bipolar people who refuse to take lithium because it robs them of their creativity, and bipolar people are well represented amongst high achievers in the arts through their brilliance during their manic phases.

Other great artists are more capable of separating their personal life and creative work. Good for them - they have it all. Some people really do have it all. Lucky them!

I'm not inclined to judge. As I said, there are lots of ways to live a life and we rarely know the full story behind people's issues, just snippets the journalists give us. Some people who appear to be throwing away the keys to the kingdom were irretrievably damaged in early life and were never going to get it together.

I am inclined to judge. So are you and everyone else and that's OK. When you congratulate an artist for a long honorable life of contribution, such as Joe Morello, that's judgment. It cuts both ways, at least for me.

As for John Bonham, ask his young son what it was like growing up without a dad because his dad choked on vomit partying in a motel room. Was his marriage that bad? If you have a public life, you have a public death. They are free to destroy themselves and others are free to discuss it.

As for whether or not they fit the definition of "tortured" and how it plays into their creativity, I just have to shrug on that. If they enjoy family, fame, fortune and creative expression and still work hard to destroy themselves, then that leads me to judge their life negatively. Maybe their creative work still stands but I and others may ridicule them personally for their their gluttony, stupidity and lack of control. Sometimes we collectively do that in advance in a really egregious case, like Charlie Sheen.
 
Trust me, Polly, I knew I was grasping at straws with that last post!

There should have been a hint of sarcasm in there.

Was John Bonham's approach worse than spending a life in an unhappy marriage in quiet suburban angst before ending up stuck in a nursing home with dementia?

That's deep. And I think for some people, avoiding that ending is what drives some to party long after they should stop.
 
As for John Bonham, ask his young son what it was like growing up without a dad because his dad choked on vomit partying in a motel room. Was his marriage that bad? If you have a public life, you have a public death. They are free to destroy themselves and others are free to discuss it.

As for whether or not they fit the definition of "tortured" and how it plays into their creativity, I just have to shrug on that. If they enjoy family, fame, fortune and creative expression and still work hard to destroy themselves, then that leads me to judge their life negatively. Maybe their creative work still stands but I and others may ridicule them personally for their their gluttony, stupidity and lack of control. Sometimes we collectively do that in advance in a really egregious case, like Charlie Sheen.

I can't relate to judgements based on "what about the children"? For some reason everything must revolve around child welfare. Children are ostensibly incredibly coddled and protected on some levels. Yet the second they reach 18 and put a foot out of line - stuff 'em, let the stupid bastards die (maybe that's 14-16 ... when they become obnoxious teens).

Until we pass that magic line, it's all kindness and care ... ostensibly. Meanwhile most people blithely accept public policy that kills masses of young people and jeopardises their futures so as to satisfy our own greed, gluttony, blood lust or moral peccadilloes.

If you're interested in ethics, parsing the public and personal is difficult so I give people the benefit of the doubt and, as much as possible, accept that stuff happens since we're all flawed humans. That goes for Republicans and incompetent artists alike lol. I guess I see too clearly through the walls of my house to throw too many stones.

In the light of all that, a Dad who's gluttonous / embarrassing and dies early is generally judged harshly based on the premise, "what about the children?". Yet if he's shown love to the child, already secured the family's financial security, and hasn't assaulted, molested, verbally abused, gambled away the family home, etc then he's done better than many other fathers. So IMO Bonzo did okay as a Dad, not great, but okay . That includes Charlie Sheen. Stuff happens, and included in the definition of "stuff" is human frailty. Included in the definition of "human frailty" is the selective judgement we apply to child welfare. So it goes.


Trust me, Polly, I knew I was grasping at straws with that last post!

There should have been a hint of sarcasm in there.

No sh**, Sherlock? :) Guess you had to say that hehehe


That's deep. And I think for some people, avoiding that ending is what drives some to party long after they should stop.

That's definitely how some see it. Most of us fear slowly wasting away more than wearing out through overuse. Yet fear of the immediacy of death usually results in the former outcome.

The hope is always to hang in there for as long as you can and then to fall off the perch relatively quickly and painlessly. That's a nice gig if you can swing it ...
 
I can't relate to judgements based on "what about the children"? For some reason everything must revolve around child welfare. .

I disagree, and have to go with DMC here.

If one wants in inflict the horror on themselves, so be it, but it's not fair to do that to one's kids.
 
And sometimes, you just have to poke fun that the negativity, violence and alienation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YUFFMA4V-w

It's a great sing-a-long!!

I wait for the day when I'll finally defile
The bodies of my ex lover's lovers.
I'll pile high to the sky
The bodies of my ex lover's lovers
I wait for the day when I'll finally destroy
The bodies of my ex lover's lovers.
I'll pile high to the sky
The bodies of my ex lover's lovers
 
I can't relate to judgements based on "what about the children"? For some reason everything must revolve around child welfare. Children are ostensibly incredibly coddled and protected on some levels. Yet the second they reach 18 and put a foot out of line - stuff 'em, let the stupid bastards die (maybe that's 14-16 ... when they become obnoxious teens).

Until we pass that magic line, it's all kindness and care ... ostensibly. Meanwhile most people blithely accept public policy that kills masses of young people and jeopardises their futures so as to satisfy our own greed, gluttony, blood lust or moral peccadilloes.

If you're interested in ethics, parsing the public and personal is difficult so I give people the benefit of the doubt and, as much as possible, accept that stuff happens since we're all flawed humans. That goes for Republicans and incompetent artists alike lol. I guess I see too clearly through the walls of my house to throw too many stones.

In the light of all that, a Dad who's gluttonous / embarrassing and dies early is generally judged harshly based on the premise, "what about the children?". Yet if he's shown love to the child, already secured the family's financial security, and hasn't assaulted, molested, verbally abused, gambled away the family home, etc then he's done better than many other fathers. So IMO Bonzo did okay as a Dad, not great, but okay . That includes Charlie Sheen. Stuff happens, and included in the definition of "stuff" is human frailty. Included in the definition of "human frailty" is the selective judgement we apply to child welfare. So it goes.




No sh**, Sherlock? :) Guess you had to say that hehehe




That's definitely how some see it. Most of us fear slowly wasting away more than wearing out through overuse. Yet fear of the immediacy of death usually results in the former outcome.

The hope is always to hang in there for as long as you can and then to fall off the perch relatively quickly and painlessly. That's a nice gig if you can swing it ...

I am unabashedly judgmental. Bonzo the musician left a great body of work, no doubt about that. Bonzo the human being failed miserably in his early 30s, choking on vomit and leaving his kid, wife, fans, bandmates and years of creativity. Yeah, it's his life and legacy to waste. And mine to judge as well. Bonzo's legacy includes being the butt of a memorable joke on Spinal Tap.

People are complex and contradictory. They can be among the greatest ever in some things, miserable failures in others. I take a wholistic assessment and I am prone to neither deify nor vilify them, unless they were exceptionally on one side or the other. The living may feel luckier than the dead and therefore point to the stupider examples of wasted life to judge, snicker about, throw stones at and discuss. Which is what I do.

I look forward to playing drums in my 90s, like that one fellow mentioned here. That's an inspiration to me.
 
Bonzo the musician left a great body of work, no doubt about that. Bonzo the human being failed miserably in his early 30s, choking on vomit and leaving his kid, wife, fans, bandmates and years of creativity. Yeah, it's his life and legacy to waste. And mine to judge as well. Bonzo's legacy includes being the butt of a memorable joke on Spinal Tap.
Point one: there can be some doubt about your first sentence; I've never been a Zep fan or even that much of a Bonham fan. I don't know why that is and I may be the only DW member who doesn't list him on my top 100 list of most influential drummers - not that I disliked his playing, but it didn't totally get me off the way many other drummers did and do. But for the purpose of this discussion, it doesn't really matter, except to illustrate that I'm far from one of his fanboys.

Point two: What Bonham failed at was staying alive, and while he was, I guess you could say that he failed to properly manage his demons and all the stress and expectations that dogged him. To opine what a waste is was that he choked on his vomit while leaving the rest of the world, including his family, hanging in a lurch, while perhaps true on some level, seems overly crass and massively insensitive.

Judge away, but what was that about walking a mile in someone else's shoes?
 
Many people with significant artistic talent tend to be a little unstable. Thousands of musicians, actors, painters, etc. have led tumultuous lives, often ending way too early. I was just watching film of Hendrix when he played at Woodstock, and then read up on his life, which was fraught with violence and rage, especially when drunk. Then again, who knows how much of this was caused by his less-than-desirable upbringing.
 
Interesting that the players seem to be playing Russian Roulette with their emotional state by specialising in that genre.

This kind of relates to a few things in this thread, not just the quote.

I'm a relatively upbeat, happy person. I'm productive, like my life and the direction it is going. It hasn't always been that way.

I use a lot the genre qualities of doom (ideology and sonic), along with black metal for that matter, to work on something along the veins of both with post-rock elements.

I find it cathartic personally, it's a way of dredging up everything haunting my memories so it doesn't eat me up inside.

I don't find it depressing, as while it can be hard to get out initially, the poetic interpretation of it (when I write lyrics) adds a dimension to it that is less self-destructive, more positive.

Kind of symbolically, it brings the darkness out into the light where it can't exist anymore, not in the state it was.
 
People are complex and contradictory. They can be among the greatest ever in some things, miserable failures in others.

That's at least one point of common ground. Personally, I don't see it as wasted life because some of these prematurely deceased stars achieved more in their short span than many do in 90 years. They gave of themselves while many have lived long parasitic lives. The shape of their lives wasn't perfect - they didn't win the Golden Gong for long-lived high level productivity, but most people miss out on that one way or another.


[
Many people with significant artistic talent tend to be a little unstable. Thousands of musicians, actors, painters, etc. have led tumultuous lives, often ending way too early. I was just watching film of Hendrix when he played at Woodstock, and then read up on his life, which was fraught with violence and rage, especially when drunk. Then again, who knows how much of this was caused by his less-than-desirable upbringing.

I agree. As I mentioned earlier, it seems that the very qualities that give some artists their incredible mojo are the ones that destroy them. So it's interesting how other great artists can be so mellow and together.

My guess is each type has a strong Child (as in Parent/Adult/Child in transactional analysis)? A person can have a healthy, playful Child while another's Child can be demanding and difficult. It depends on how much the Child is tempered by a person's Adult.

On a more mundane level, I think it's pretty well known how once a person becomes a "star" they often find themselves surrounded by sycophants and yes-men, which robs them of the usual social checks and balances. This seems to especially be the case with those who found fame and fortune young, before they developed the knowledge and assertiveness to recognise and reject parasites.


I'm a relatively upbeat, happy person. I'm productive, like my life and the direction it is going. It hasn't always been that way.

I use a lot the genre qualities of doom (ideology and sonic), along with black metal for that matter, to work on something along the veins of both with post-rock elements.

I find it cathartic personally, it's a way of dredging up everything haunting my memories so it doesn't eat me up inside.

It can go either way, can't it? For some fans, ostensibly negative music fuels their own negative emotions. For others, it reflects and spends those emotions, as though it's comforting to hear from someone who seems to get it.

I've met a few metalheads through work and it surprised me to find what lovely, mellow guys they were. One was a good work friend and he looked pretty scary, but he was just a big pussycat. I was a Black Sabbath fan when I was young and I remember the intensity hitting the spot like a rough massage on sore muscles. None of this really meshed with the violence I sometimes saw at heavy gigs back then. It can go either way.
 
I've met a few metalheads through work and it surprised me to find what lovely, mellow guys they were. One was a good work friend and he looked pretty scary, but he was just a big pussycat. I was a Black Sabbath fan when I was young and I remember the intensity hitting the spot like a rough massage on sore muscles. None of this really meshed with the violence I sometimes saw at heavy gigs back then. It can go either way.

I've been to some extraordinarily violent rock gigs from bands I wouldn't consider metal.

I think you've made a brilliant point on the topic of stereotyping, while metal has a fashion, not everyone passionate about it wears it. Not everyone acts like the media portrays they will either, though in all honesty, metal is pretty non-existent in the media. The only time it will get coverage is if there is something stereotypically negative, like a huge fight at a sell out concert.

It's also worth noting that very few people listen to solely one kind of music, I used to play jazz, and listen to a lot of post-rock amongst other things. Metal bands, like metal heads, are just as diverse, I could name a dozen bands, each one with as much in common with each other as Frank Sinatra and The Ramones.

Cynically, if you want to look at why these stereotypes get reinforced, by moderating public opinion to the point people start to pigeonhole each other and conform, it makes target advertising and selling product much easier.

You'd think in such a post-modern society people would be smart enough, or at least accustomed to questioning 'truths' but this certainly isn't always the case. A lot of people still just like to be told, not take responsibility for their opinions.

Heavy stuff.
 
Back
Top