Comments

  • How about this leaflet...

    i.ytimg.comView Full Size
  • Weird, I just heard the Jessica Simpson sample of Jack & Diane a little while ago in the grocery store of all places.

    Food I think that I'm in love with you.
  • Isn't it nice how worthless, know-nothing dumbf*cks love to post subjective  lists of what is the best about things that are completely subjective?  It's almost as if their are intensely stupid, have nothing better to do and have no understanding that the "quality" of music is 100% dependent upon the individual listener.

    Please, one of you people who pissed your worthless life away studying music can tell me that ranking all music is absolute and you know what is the best.
  • OK. Fark it. I'm bored.

    I read a book by Chuck Klosterman called What If We're Wrong?, where one of the central themes is "What will be the defining memory of rock & roll music 500 years from today?" In other words what/who, if anything, will stand out centuries from now in a way that Beethoven and Mozart are regarded today?

    Klosterman writes a lot about music and sports, so he is fascinated by this phenomenon whereby now, in the present moment, we think we understand what's cool and/or artistically valuable, but sometimes after a sufficient amount of time passes, those perceptions can change and we start to see things we disregarded in the past or we discover something from the past that the world had finally caught up to.

    It's in this light that I admit that I'm fascinated by the career of John Mellencamp. No doubt he's had the pop hits, but is there a guy you can think of that's produced such a sneaky influencial and artistically diverse range of output? Seriously, this guy is - even with his Rock & Roll and American Songwriter HOF nods, incredibly underrated - and has been since critics unfairly wrote him off early on as a Springsteen wannabe.

    He's sold 60MM records from mainly 23 studio albums. He founded Farm Aid. He's arguably the father of alternative country. He's worked with rappers, jazz and big band musicians. His session and touring bands are considered by professional musicians to be some of the best in the industry year after year.

    Still, I bet if I asked you to take a month to contemplate and document your 50 (maybe 100) most accomplished American songwriters, he wouldn't immediately come to mind, but as soon as I said his name, you'd go, "Oh, yeah."

    I'll finish by going way out on a limb - 500 years from now, John Mellencamp has a better chance of being looked at, by future music historians, as the soul of rock & roll than Bruce Springsteen does.
  • selling huge amount of records only means you're popular. pop. like the monkees. who i love. pop music does not mean good music. it means it's popular. and most people are idiots.
  • While my tolerance for most Mellencamp songs has gone rather markedly down over the years, I never had any for "Jack and Diane".
  • jerryskid: Isn't it nice how worthless, know-nothing dumbf*cks love to post subjective  lists of what is the best about things that are completely subjective?  It's almost as if their are intensely stupid, have nothing better to do and have no understanding that the "quality" of music is 100% dependent upon the individual listener.

    Please, one of you people who pissed your worthless life away studying music can tell me that ranking all music is absolute and you know what is the best.


    Oh yeah? Life goes on...

    /forget it Jack it's cougertown
  • The Pope of Manwich Village: OK. Fark it. I'm bored.

    I read a book by Chuck Klosterman called What If We're Wrong?, where one of the central themes is "What will be the defining memory of rock & roll music 500 years from today?" In other words what/who, if anything, will stand out centuries from now in a way that Beethoven and Mozart are regarded today?

    Klosterman writes a lot about music and sports, so he is fascinated by this phenomenon whereby now, in the present moment, we think we understand what's cool and/or artistically valuable, but sometimes after a sufficient amount of time passes, those perceptions can change and we start to see things we disregarded in the past or we discover something from the past that the world had finally caught up to.

    It's in this light that I admit that I'm fascinated by the career of John Mellencamp. No doubt he's had the pop hits, but is there a guy you can think of that's produced such a sneaky influencial and artistically diverse range of output? Seriously, this guy is - even with his Rock & Roll and American Songwriter HOF nods, incredibly underrated - and has been since critics unfairly wrote him off early on as a Springsteen wannabe.

    He's sold 60MM records from mainly 23 studio albums. He founded Farm Aid. He's arguably the father of alternative country. He's worked with rappers, jazz and big band musicians. His session and touring bands are considered by professional musicians to be some of the best in the industry year after year.

    Still, I bet if I asked you to take a month to contemplate and document your 50 (maybe 100) most accomplished American songwriters, he wouldn't immediately come to mind, but as soon as I said his name, you'd go, "Oh, yeah."

    I'll finish by going way out on a limb - 500 years from now, John Mellencamp has a better chance of being looked at, by future music historians, as the soul of rock & roll than Bruce Springsteen does.


    Only because Bruce sucks infinitely worse than Madonna.

    /John isn't going to sleep with you, you can stop white knighting him
  • Jack and Diane but most of the lyrics are "suckin' on a chili dog"
    Youtube 6QX57aIDbDU
  • The Pope of Manwich Village: OK. Fark it. I'm bored.

    I read a book by Chuck Klosterman called What If We're Wrong?, where one of the central themes is "What will be the defining memory of rock & roll music 500 years from today?" In other words what/who, if anything, will stand out centuries from now in a way that Beethoven and Mozart are regarded today?


    Mozart was famous in his own time wasn't he? I'm not a classical music expert but my impression has always been that some of those guys were held in high regard during their lifetimes.

    I ask this because if Mozart was a big deal back then it implies that someone who is a big deal now will be the one still talked about 500 years from now. By 'now' I mean in this music era not literally now. Therefore I'd guess Elvis, The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Springsteen, and Dylan most likely(of rock music) would be the Mozart level of the future. Buddy Holly, Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd...these would be like the Schuberts or Handels of the future. Still listened to, but maybe not as widely known and loved.

    Mellencamp would fall in the Scott Joplin category of people who had some catchy tunes in their day and in the future there will still be a few people who get a kick out of listening to them.
  • This entire thread

    pbs.twimg.comView Full Size


    /I like Mellencamp just fine.  He's got some really good tunes.  I won't go out of my way to listen to him but I certainly wouldn't actively navigate to a website to express my dislike of him.
  • Birnone: Mozart was famous in his own time wasn't he? I'm not a classical music expert but my impression has always been that some of those guys were held in high regard during their lifetimes.


    Antonio Salieri was the most popular composer of his time.  His immediate influence can be heard in his students, Liszt, Beethoven, Schubert and even Mozart.

    Yet today he's largely remembered thanks to a Russian playwright who penned a completely inaccurate portrayal of his relationship with Mozart which, would form the basis of an Oscar winning film.

    Contemporaneous fame is no guarantee of a lasting legacy.
  • That's when a sport was a sport.

    Most underrated  mis-heard lyric.
  • Snapper Carr: Birnone: Mozart was famous in his own time wasn't he? I'm not a classical music expert but my impression has always been that some of those guys were held in high regard during their lifetimes.

    Antonio Salieri was the most popular composer of his time.  His immediate influence can be heard in his students, Liszt, Beethoven, Schubert and even Mozart.

    Yet today he's largely remembered thanks to a Russian playwright who penned a completely inaccurate portrayal of his relationship with Mozart which, would form the basis of an Oscar winning film.

    Contemporaneous fame is no guarantee of a lasting legacy.


    But it is a big factor in the capability for historical recognition. Very few no name artists later go on to renown .

    Those who were famous in life may lose fame as the decades pass, but most of those we know today were known in their time. Particularly these days, the amount of press they receive will impact the available knowledge about them in the future, and that will be the basis for all the paid b the word hacks who drag them up ever after.

    /Indiana boy here, so I see a lot more on him than some others might. I enjoy a number of his songs, but I'll always appreciate him first and foremost for 
    John Mellencamp Aint Even Done With the Night
    Youtube DagIivbPlCU
  • He's like Tom Petty for me: I don't have any of his stuff, but I don't turn it off when it comes on.
  • He's no Hootie, but I guess he's all right.
  • Birnone: The Pope of Manwich Village: OK. Fark it. I'm bored.

    I read a book by Chuck Klosterman called What If We're Wrong?, where one of the central themes is "What will be the defining memory of rock & roll music 500 years from today?" In other words what/who, if anything, will stand out centuries from now in a way that Beethoven and Mozart are regarded today?

    Mozart was famous in his own time wasn't he? I'm not a classical music expert but my impression has always been that some of those guys were held in high regard during their lifetimes.

    I ask this because if Mozart was a big deal back then it implies that someone who is a big deal now will be the one still talked about 500 years from now. By 'now' I mean in this music era not literally now. Therefore I'd guess Elvis, The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Springsteen, and Dylan most likely(of rock music) would be the Mozart level of the future. Buddy Holly, Rolling Stones, Pink Floyd...these would be like the Schuberts or Handels of the future. Still listened to, but maybe not as widely known and loved.

    Mellencamp would fall in the Scott Joplin category of people who had some catchy tunes in their day and in the future there will still be a few people who get a kick out of listening to them.


    Bach is the only one I can think of who wasn't popular in his time.
  • I thought Lonesome Jubilee was the best album by far. Earlier stuff was fluff, everything after Jubilee is just crazy old man stuff.
  • "I need a lover" is a damn fine rock song.
  • I remember a great TV commercial he was in probably 30 years ago, and I can't remember who it was for and I can't find it online, but it's in B&W...he's playing pool in some smoky dive bar, shooting the shiate (was Bo Diddley in it? Or am I thinking that bc of the Bo Knows spots?). Anyway, he's talking about how the record company wanted him to bill himself as Johnny Cougar. And he says he didn't want to bc of how dumb it sounded but finally relented bc, as he says, The Beatles had a dumb name but look what happened to them. The others smile and laugh. He continues...But I forgot one thing....I ain't The Beatles. Laughter ensues.

    Didn't like Jack and Diane (that song was played every hour on the hour for months) or that album so much, but I thought, and still do, that Uh Huh was fantastic.
  • I remember a DJ calling him John Camp Cougarmellon
  • No Better Than This is fantastic
  • My (totally subjective) faves are Big Daddy, Human Wheels, and Whenever We Wanted. I love that Mr. Happy Go Lucky has an overture.
  •  

This thread is closed to new comments.