Author's Discussion: What Made Nirvana Work?
Alright guys, thanks for sticking with me as I upload new parts for my TL. As we continue to cover the events that sprawl out from a crossover between two 90s icons, we must ask -
what made Nirvana work? By this I mean why did Nirvana take the world by storm in the early 1990s, what exactly made their sound so appealing, and could anything sink their popularity had Kurt Cobain not tragically commit suicide?
Before we take a look at what made Nirvana so popular among the youth of the 1990s, we must take a look at the popular music scene before Nirvana became popular. By the late 1980s, the music industry was dominated by two huge genres: glam metal and pop music (at least in the 1980s sense of pop). While yes, both of these genres had many great music and artists - Quiet Riot, Def Leppard, Twisted Sister and Bon Jovi for the former, Cyndi Lauper, Michael Jackson, Prince and Madonna for the latter - both genres had arguably become increasingly stale and listless around the 1988-1991 period.
For glam metal in particular, gone was the initial raw energy and rebellion defined by songs such as Quiet Riot’s version of “Cum On Feel the Noize” or Twisted Sister’s “We’re Not Gonna Take It”[1], and replacing it were these overblown, decadent power ballads such as Warrant’s “Heaven” or Whitesnake’s “Is This Love”. In short, the glam metal scene became
way too oversaturated, was seen as increasingly bloated and toxic - particularly in wake of the 1988 documentary
The Decline of Western Civilization Part II: The Metal Years, and most importantly they were perceived as soulless and corporate music more likely to be played in suburban shopping malls than rebellious underground clubs.
Despite some noticeable bright spots such as Sinéad O’Connor’s and her emotional ballad “Nothing Compares 2 U”, the pop scene of that time period hardly fared much better. For one, the already cold perception of pop’s corporate roots was
absolutely not helped by the scandals of Milli Vanilli, in which the supposed members of the band - Fab Morvan and Rob Pilatus -
did not even sing their own vocals on their records[2], causing immense backlash with most of their records recalled and their Grammy revoked. Furthermore, the increasing reliance on highly choreographed performances, flashy music videos, and heavy emphasis on image over musical substance in the pop scene created a sense of disillusionment among certain sections of the audience. While the era did produce iconic music and performances, there was a growing sentiment that the genre was becoming overly manufactured and disconnected from the genuine artistry of music.
And thus we enter the grunge scene. During the 1980s, bands around the Seattle area would produce an eclectic mix of Seattle’s punk and metal scenes, blending these influences to create a sound that was raw, gritty, and emotionally charged. A big part of the grunge aesthetic was that Seattle in the 1980s was poor, mainly working class, and isolated from the main pop culture power centers like New York and Los Angeles.[3] Bands like the Fartz, 10 Minute Warning, the Accüsed, the Fastbacks, and most of all The Melvins would set the stage for what was to come with their resonant sound that would reflect the economic and social realities of Seattle at the time. The Melvins, in particular, played a crucial role in shaping the sound that would come to be known as grunge. Their heavy, slow, sludgy style was a significant departure from the faster tempos of traditional punk. This unique sound would heavily influence the bands that followed, including Nirvana.
Speaking of which, it was in 1987 that Kurt Cobain and Krist Novoselic - both friends who shared a mutual love for the Melvins - started a band that would eventually become known as Nirvana. After signing up with the record label Sub Pop, they would release their first single, “Love Buzz”, in November 1988. Their first album
Bleach (1989) would soon follow, and the band would become known for their unique combination of punk sensibilities, pop melodies and themes of social alienation. Throw in the coming of age of a disaffected and less than prosperous Generation X, and an economic downturn caused by the Persian Gulf War causing the Cold War to end on a rather bitter-sweet note, and the rotting structure now pejoratively known as “hair metal” had its door kicked in on September 24, 1991 with the release of the album
Nevermind.
Nevermind instantly became a critical and commercial success and topped music charts around the world. The band would be propelled into stardom almost overnight…..
….Much to the dismay of Kurt Cobain. Yeah. It’s very complicated you see. Kurt
wanted fame - but the type of fame he was thinking about was becoming the next Sonic Youth. With that expectation, he expected that he would still be able to live the punk lifestyle - performing often in small clubs and maintaining a close connection with the fanbase. Not only that, but given all that we know about his upbringing and formative years, he felt that achieving fame would fill the emotional and mental void he had - even if he wasn’t really into the typical macho man rockstar lifestyle (i.e. partying, fame, sleeping with lots of women).
Instead, they ended up achieving a level of fame more like The Beatles some 3 decades earlier. And because of that, while Kurt was blessed with many of the benefits of fame, they were also cursed with many of the inconveniences of it.[4] There was the constant nagging, the constant interviews, and the constant tabloids sticking their noses into his private life. Going to places as public as a thrift shop or a bar is now out of the question, as is performing in bands at local clubs. He faced the prospect of his band becoming a business, surrounded by boardroom meetings, lawyers, and marketing executives. He was being called the voice of a generation, having his face plastered on magazines, and his hand was forced into defending his wife and daughter from a smear campaign involving the former taking heroin during pregnancy. Yet the cons bothered Kurt
so much, and of course this would basically nuke his mental health while kicking his heroin addiction into overdrive in the final years. And that’s not even getting into the issue of punk ethics or how many believe mainstream music is rather antithetical to punk music.
Which finally leads us to address the giant, space-time temporal elephant in the room: had Kurt Cobain not committed suicide in 1994, would human nature and the post death myth rear their ugly heads and mean that Cobain degenerates into either a washed-up star or a terrible person -
kinda like a certain other person this TL focuses on (oh, just you wait…)? Well, it’s complicated. Musical acts often have what I like to call a set of “prime years”. These are the years that their musical output and talent are at their absolute apex and are obviously, when they are in their prime. Normally, these “prime years” last a good 15 years - with some bending closer to 14 or 16 or 17 years. Elvis Presley’s prime years started in 1956 with the release of “Heartbreak Hotel” and ended around 1971 with his slow transformation into Fat Elvis. The Beatles’ prime years started in 1964 when “I Wanna Hold Your Hand” hit Number 1 on the US Billboard Hot 100 charts and ended in 1980 with the assassination of John Lennon.[5] Michael Jackson’s prime years started in 1979 with the release of the album
Off the Wall and ended in 1993 with the infamous child sexual abuse allegations. If we assume that Nirvana’s hypothetical prime years started in 1991 with the release of
Nevermind and could have lasted to around 2005-2008 only to be cut short in 1994 with Cobain’s suicide - that leaves at least a decade of great music made by the band if we assume an alternate timeline where Cobain got his shit together.
This in turn leaves some important questions:
- Would a sober Kurt Cobain be more boring than his OTL counterpart?
- Assuming Nirvana made it through all their prime years, would they go through a slow and painful decline afterwards like so many rock bands have undergone from The Rolling Stones to Metallica - effectively embodying the trope of either dying a hero or living long enough to become a villain?
- What exactly would be required to bring Cobain back from the brink?
For the former two, I’m cautiously optimistic to say
no. Yes, his drug use was certainly an aspect of the sound he was making, but Kurt Cobain's talent and creativity went far beyond his struggles with addiction. His songwriting was deeply introspective and often reflected his personal experiences and viewpoints. It's important to remember that while his struggles may have influenced his art, they were not the sole source of his creativity. A sober Kurt Cobain might have offered a different perspective in his music, potentially exploring new themes and ideas, but it's likely that his core talent as a songwriter and musician would remain. As for the possibility of going downhill in later years, that is unfortunately a common reality that applies to artists and bands past their prime years. However, Cobain’s aversion to fame - if it still persists years later - would have two effects that could mitigate a catastrophic fall from grace past their prime years. The first effect is that it would lower the chances of some pathetically lame attempts at trying to stay relevant, assuming the Cobain of the 2000s/2010s has that same aversion as the Cobain of the 1990s and thus doesn’t try to chase mainstream music trends. The second effect is that given by the making of this TL (2024), a Kurt Cobain that lived would be 57 - the band would probably bow out sometime between the mid 2010s and the early 2020s. Cobain would likely retire while Grohl and Novoselic would probably do their own things. For the latter - regarding what it would take to save Cobain - it would require at minimum Kurt to be isolated from the public eye, to not be involved with music production, and to quit his heavy drug use while finding another way to control his stomach pains. This would likely involve a long retreat into therapy for about 2 years, with an extra year spent getting the band back together. I ultimately expect Nirvana’s music post-therapy to be very different from what it was pre-therapy.
To sum it all up, Nirvana’s music did not originate in a vacuum - and a large part of the band’s popularity other than their artistic merits came from a backlash to the excesses of 1980s glam metal. The fact that the band became so globally popular and far exceeded even Kurt Cobain’s expectations played a major role in Cobain’s eventual downfall and suicide IOTL. The possibility of the band’s sound eventually becoming uninspired or simply terrible in an alternate timeline where Cobain lived depends on if Kurt Cobain balances his views on being mainstream (never selling out but never paranoid about it) and the band’s ability to continuously evolve their sound. The idea of reforming Kurt would take much effort and care to dismantle his key issues. What do you guys think? Was Kurt Cobain really doomed by the pressures of fame? Would a Kurt Cobain that lived turn out to be a much worse or overrated artist than we usually give him credit for? Let me know in the comments.
[1] In my opinion, I much prefer the earlier wave of glam metal between 1983 and 1986, particularly since those two aforementioned songs are my personal favorites of the genre.
[2] Apparently, lip syncing was/is a more common and accepted recording practice in European countries such as Germany (where Milli Vanilli was from), so that may explain the controversy over here in America.
[3] Prior to the 1990s, most American pop culture and media was
very fixated on New York, Los Angeles, and
maybe Chicago.
[4] Mainly for Cobain. Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic are nonfactors when it comes to this discussion since 1) they didn’t mind the fame and attention themselves and 2) Kurt was pretty much the face of Nirvana, and all the tabloids focused on Kurt since he was basically their little circus clown; Dave and Krist weren’t all that interesting to them. A good comparison would probably be The Doors a generation earlier - where everyone just
loved Jim Morrison. Can’t really say the same for Ray Manzarek, Robby Krieger or John Densmore.
[5] By this I mean the band and their members alone.
