+(1).jpg)
The thing is, Pearl Jam's popularity was unlike anything that I had ever witnessed before. Given that many artists are popular, often times flavor of the moment kind of musicians, perhaps this level of popularity that Pearl jam in particular reached needs some clarification.
When I started really getting into Pearl Jam, their popularity was already very strong, and growing very rapidly. Think I mentioned already that it was finding out about the song "Jeremy" that really got me into the band. Well, it seems that that song in particular is what allowed the group to explode into almost unprecedented popularity. What I mean by that is that they were different, hard to pin down or define, exactly. And that was part of their allure.
Case in point, let me share a story. I was hardly the only one who was into Pearl Jam, and I had a close friend who also was really into them. This guy tends to focus on numbers, and he really seemed to know what was most popular in terms of sales, as well as monetary value. I am not saying that he was right in focusing in on that, but it was just a skill that he had, I guess.
In any case, this guy obtained a copy of the suddenly very hard to find cd single, "Jeremy". I mean, I went to the store where he picked up his copy, and there was nothing left. All copies were gone. I checked in other places in hopes of getting my hands on it, but it was nowhere to be found. In passing, I mentioned to him the possibility that Pearl Jam might re-release the single.
He asked me if I was stupid. "Nobody re-releases singles!" I think he might have added a colorful insult or two, just for added emphasis. What was worse, was that he was right! I couldn't think of any examples of any band re-releasing singles.
Still, I responded, saying that "they" (whoever "they" are) would re-release them if it made money. Whatever makes money, right? But I said that with only half conviction, because mostly, it seemed like he was right. What were the chances?
The thing is, they did re-release the Jeremy cd single. Not just Jeremy, for that matter, but all of their cd singles from the "Ten" album. I have copies of some of them, for that matter. I should also note, that on a trip to the city, I was able to get a bootleg of the band that had all of the cd singles on the one disk, and so was able to enjoy the music. Later on, I found a place that had the "Jeremy" cd single specifically, the one with the little girl and the gun. I got it, and the sense of urgency to obtain a copy was done. But still, to see these singles re-released seemed a clear indicator of the phenomenal level of popularity of the band. At least it did to me. That was what seemed the clearest indicator that they had reached a new level of popularity that nobody could really contend with at the time, and few have ever been able to contend with at any point. The Beatles, surely. The Stones, or Elvis, maybe. Led Zeppelin, perhaps. But very few others could even be mentioned in the same breath, at least in terms of the level of popularity at their very peak.
There are other indicators of the phenomenal success that the band reached (I was about to say, enjoyed, but given the history of the band, whether or not they "enjoyed" the popularity that they reached is open to debate, with the band and many others claiming that they did not in fact enjoy it at all, and other, more skeptical people claiming that the band enjoyed it far more than they let on). In the first week of the release of their second album, "Versus" (which originally was untitled for the first million copies or so, before the title was given, and allowed the first batch of untitled releases to be labeled at least relatively rare, and thus, a collector's item for fans). That album had almost one million sales in it's first week, easily reaching the top spot on Billboards, and in fact, outperformed all the other albums on the Billboard combined that week. How many bands do you know that were that popular?
Whether or not the band actually enjoyed this popularity, it is impossible to separate them from it. Given how much it was indirectly mentioned in some of their lyrics (repeatedly, in numerous songs), and the band's own response and problems stemming from it (Eddie Vedder's house was targeted by one mad driver at some point), the popularity of the band was part of it's identity, whether or not it was embraced. Much like the screaming throngs of fans during the sixties for groups like the Beatles or Stones, the Beach Boys or the Doors, the signs of extraordinary popularity for the band were everywhere.
Yet, that has pretty much always been the main behind this band. They exploded into fame in 1992, essentially reaching the status as the world's most popular and trendy band. They were the next big thing, so to speak. And although the band itself seemed to purposely distance itself from the fame, it could not be forgotten that they had worked very hard to acquire it in the first place. As Mick Wall quite correctly points out, the question of credibility always seemed to weight the band down, and mostly, it was the result of the accusations from the front man of another huge Seattle band, Nirvana that had no issues whatsoever with their own credibility. Indeed, if you watch "Twenty", you will see that these accusations by Kurt Cobain were not taken lightly by the members of Pearl Jam themselves and, in fact, they felt that they had to watch everything that they did. In a manner of speaking, Cobain's criticism of Pearl Jam kept the band honest, since they felt like they were walking on egg shells.
To that end, Pearl Jam seemed almost to rebel against their own popularity. Eddie Vedder alluded to it in lyrics to numerous songs. The band stopped doing videos, and suddenly, limited their touring. They shied away from interviews and any kind of promotion. Still, they seemed to be as popular as ever with the release of their second, and then their third album, and even their two-track release of Merkinball. It is not even impossible that their popularity actually continued to grow as a result of their protesting against it in their own way, made them unique as well, and perhaps some cynics of the band who observed all of this were skeptical that it was not all a very clever ploy of some sort. Whatever way you interpret it, the fact is the band continues to have strong detractors, as well as a very strong and loyal base of fans. Kurt Cobain made some amends, at least towards Eddie Vedder personally, but many others did not. Courtney Love once suggested, in reference to her husband's taking his own life, that it should have been Eddie. Shortly after his suicide, there were t-shirts being sold that read "Eddie's Next". As for criticism of the band, I remember personally hearing about PJ Harvey essentially dismissing Pearl Jam.
It seemed, paradoxically, that while the band had struggled (only very briefly) to make a name for itself and gain acceptance, once it got that and then some, they struggled to get the acceptance from others as their popularity grew, and this has strongly defined their identity. The more popular they became, the more they at least publicly shirked their own popularity in order to gain the approval of those who remained skeptical precisely because of their popularity. Many other bands would have simply enjoyed the popularity and milked it outright for all that it was worth, for as long as humanly possible. But that was never an option for Pearl Jam, since much of their fan base (particularly early on) was predicated precisely on that audience that tended to reject "popular" music. It was quite a conundrum, on many levels.
In the meantime, Pearl Jam continued to grow, to evolve. Their music changed, and so did the levels of their popularity. It became undeniable following the release of No Code, their fourth album. That is actually a beautiful and well done work, and truly a great album that the band should be proud of. Initially, the first few days that it went public, it sold very nicely. But the numbers died off very quickly, and that marked the beginning of the end of the phenomenal level of popularity and success (at least in terms of numbers) for Pearl Jam. It could be argued that they briefly enjoyed considerable success with Yield, yet even that was muted, at least in comparison to the phenomenal, staggering levels of popularity that Pearl Jam had in the early nineties. Their musical style changed and, following the rise of George W. Bush and the "global war on terror" that he ushered in, Pearl Jam became more overtly political - something that, quite inexplicably, shocked people. I'm not entirely sure why even to this day, since the band had always been political. To me, it was a part of what attracted me to them in the first place. It drove some others away, however.
But I am getting ahead of myself. Mick Wall's "Pearl Jam" book was written at the time of the peak of their commercial success, when they were, as Time magazine suggested, "all the rage". It only delves into their early history, before they began to lose so much of their popularity.
This book reminded me at times so much of another book that I read (admittedly, around ten years or so ago), that I kept having to look at the cover, to make sure that I was reading the right book. I'm thinking specifically of Kim Neely's "Five Against One", which is not only an excellent read, but still the standard bearer for books about Pearl Jam, if you are so interested. There were points when I felt that I had read the material before, and I mean word for word. I know that it is on the same subject, but it was more than that. Perhaps they share some of the same quotes, or something.
Ultimately, if you are a fan of Pearl Jam, this is a good book, always keeping in mind that it is outdated (at least, the version that I have of it is, although there may be some updated version of it floating around somewhere). It is well-written and insightful, and delves into some of the more complex issues surrounding the band, particularly in relation to their reaction and struggles with their own popularity.
As I think I have mentioned before, I seem to grow in and out of the mood for bands, often times. Pearl Jam is among them. I had not really listened to them for quite a few months prior to the 12/12/12 concert. But then, after that concert, I finally saw the Crowe movie about them, and have been in the mood ever since. So, in that spirit, I will write a review on the accompanying book sometime in the fairly near future, when I finish reading it.
No comments:
Post a Comment