Perry Farrell, the former headman of Jane's Addiction, started the Lollapalooza festival, a highlight for "alternative" rockers. This festival is an all-day concert that many Generation X-er's attend in order to see their favorite bands. The most recent festival that came through Hartford was a disaster. It was at the brand new Meadows Music Theater, and left the place a complete mess. Lollapalooza has proven to be a gathering place of pathetic alternative bands. It barely got off the ground this year. Farrell was scavenging around at the last minute looking for bands to throw together. Sinead O'Connor left the tour during the show in Chicago, leaving many of the fans disappointed. How could they not be disappointed when the one talented musician left the tour, leaving musicians like the one hit wonder, Beck, to take up the slack?

Green Day and Weezer are excellent examples of today's terrible bands. These bands are categorized as "alternative." This new label "alternative" seems to take many of the new less talented bands and put them under one roof. What I would like to know is what is alternative supposed to mean? What are these new bands alternative to? Many of them sound very much alike, so they are not alternative to each other. The music of today has seemed to have lost something; perhaps that is what "alternative" means. Perhaps "alternative" means.... bands that suck. Groups like the Offspring or White Zombie also fall into this "alternative" wastebasket. Much of the garbage listened to has a loud, grinding effect. Very rarely will you catch anyone listening to Nine Inch Nails with their stereo turned down to a reasonable level, so that their floor isn't vibrating. It is not a big surprise that Nirvana's best album, Live in New York, which wasn't even that good, consists of many tracks that were written by musicians who were not members of the band. This further proves that many of today's bands are not comprised of the talent that many bands of the past have possessed.

A great example of a talented band from the past is the Beatles. Much like today's bands, the Beatles started off playing small gigs, covering tunes by other musicians. Chuck Berry was instrumental to the development of the Beatles. Eventually the band learned how to compose and perform their own music. They developed a following wherever they performed. Lennon and McCartney are supposedly one of the best song writing duos of all time. The Beatles weren't alone in the music industry. Other great bands that have stood the test of time are The Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, and Creedence Clearwater Revival, to name a few. I realize that these bands are "Classic Rock" bands, but that is my point. Very few modern rock bands have been able to rival these amazing rock musicians of the past.

It would be inaccurate to claim that there isn't any talent in today's Rock and Roll industry. Some of today's bands are excellent. Wonderful examples of good Modern Rock bands are U2, R.E.M, and the Cranberries. These groups often get categorized as being "alternative," but these bands don't fit into the mold that many of the other less talented groups do. One reason they don't fit is that they are very diverse. Each band is capable of creating music that is different from things they have composed in the past and in that respect they are definitely alternative. R.E.M and U2 are especially capable of this; it is obvious if you compare both bands' most recent releases with the music of their earlier years. R.E.M's releases Out of Time and Automatic For The People are completely different from all of their other albums, for the band seemed to make a detour from Rock and Roll with these two records. Monster, their most recent album, brought the band back to its roots: Rock and Roll. The Cranberries are unlike any other band on the modern rock scene. Dolores O'Riordan's voice is very distinguishable. One could never confuse her with any other vocalist. Although they are relatively new, the Cranberries show promise in their two studio releases.

U2 is probably the most creative of the three bands I've mentioned. Their best selling album The Joshua Tree is different from their follow up albums Rattle and Hum, Achtung Baby, and Zooropa. Rattle and Hum is by far their most diverse album, which combines rock and roll with gospel and blues and gives the album a diversity that is uncommon in many groups from any era. Musical legends such as B.B. King and Bob Dylan accompanied U2 on their 1988 release of live and studio recordings. There are other bands that deserve a "thumbs up" as well. I am just using these three bands as examples of wonderful Modern Rock bands.

This new "alternative" music, which really isn't terribly new, is supposedly a cultural movement as well as musical expression. It is the foundation of the Generation X'ers. This lifestyle, rather this "alternative" lifestyle, is focused around a young age group. The Generation X'ers range from 15-year-olds to people who are 25. Many of them can be seen riding skateboards, wearing corduroy, flannel, concert t shirts, and suede sneakers, preferably Converse All-Stars or One Stars. I know this is a very broad generalization, but it is too bad if I am offending anyone. Many of the Generation X'ers think they are being different. Unfortunately, they don't realize that they are all being different together and in the same way. It would be like wearing a tie dye t-shirt to be original. Similar to the music they subscribe to they aren't attaining their goals.

I think Modern Rock and Roll needs a face lift. It is sad to see bands such as Green Day and Filter selling millions of copies of their albums. It is humorous to imagine these bands with acoustic guitars and without their distorted amplifiers. There wouldn't be anything to them. Perhaps Weezer should go on an acoustic tour. Maybe they would gain more fan support. Then again, maybe the little Generation X-er's would kick them off the stage. It is an entertaining thought. If these bands stick around much longer, Rock and Roll will be recovering from the Nineties for a long time.

© Trincoll Journal, 1995.