Loudon Wainwright had a top 20 hit with "Dead Skunk"
--there's a dead skunk in the middle of the road, stinking to high heaven...etc... Loudon has about 22 albums, many of them quite good, some are real stinkers, though. He has a very cynical sense of humor and a bleak outlook. He was featured in a few M*A*S*H episodes and appears a few times a year on NPR's Morning Editon to do political satire in song. His most recent live album is worth checking out. There is a vicious evalutation of Bob Dylan called "Talking New Bob Dylan" on his "History" album...it's snide, learing and throws not a few jabs at Dylan, quiet perceptive and uses the Guthrie/Dylan frame of "Talking Blues" to insert the knife.
Pierce, on the other hand, played regularly in this area at bars and coffee shopes and Pyewackett in the 80s before going national with a few Windham Hill releases... -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % % % "I have heard the mermaids singing each to each. I do not think they % % will sing to me" --from "Prufrock" by T.S. Eliot %
1. James Taylor 2. Loudon Wainwright III (actually didn't live here long) 3. Pierce Pettis (fairly well known in the singer-songwriter community)
--those are about the only 3 performers I can think of that would be "known" widely outside of the region by the average "joe" or "joesephine".
Keith Weston
Also, I might add: Elisabeth Cotten -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % % % "I have heard the mermaids singing each to each. I do not think they % % will sing to me" --from "Prufrock" by T.S. Eliot %
>In article <3d73vm$2...@bigblue.oit.unc.edu>, >J Keith Weston <jkwes...@email.unc.edu> wrote: >>Famours "bands"/"performers" from Chapel Hill:
>>1. James Taylor >>2. Loudon Wainwright III (actually didn't live here long) >>3. Pierce Pettis (fairly well known in the singer-songwriter community)
Hmmm...maybe we could add Yaggfu Front? I really don't know what kind of a splash they've made in the nat'l hip hop community, though. And I guess they aren't from Chapel Hill proper. From Durham, one could add Clyde McPhatter, Rev. Gary Davis (for a little while), Blind Boy Fuller....the latter 2 being questionable in terms of widespread recognition. Holly
In article <3d73vm$2...@bigblue.oit.unc.edu>, J Keith Weston <jkwes...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
>Famours "bands"/"performers" from Chapel Hill:
>1. James Taylor >2. Loudon Wainwright III (actually didn't live here long) >3. Pierce Pettis (fairly well known in the singer-songwriter community)
>--those are about the only 3 performers I can think of that would be >"known" widely outside of the region by the average "joe" or "joesephine".
George Hamilton IV "The Ambassador of Country Music" and his son Hege V. I bet just as many people around the country know Mike Cross as know Piere Pettis. Cross has pockets of fans all over the US. Livingston Taylor is as famous as Pettis too so you have to count him.
bittr...@email.unc.edu (Greg Humphreys) writes: >Seattle is a huge metropolitan area - ala Detroit scene early 70s,LA >powerpop and punk scenes etc. Chapel-hill-raleigh-durham is a smaller >scale thing, reminding me more of Austin, Athens or Minneapolis >type communities. Besides, you should 'wait until the movie's over before >you leave the theater.'
Yeah. I mean, for a town with, what, half a million? a million? less people than Seattle, Chapel Hill does just fine, thank you.
> Actually, now that I think about it, it's pretty obvious.
> No majorly famous indie band has ever came from here.
> Just a lot of semi-regionally famous ones, but never anything > on the fame level of a pearl jam, or a nirvana, or a STP, or > hell, anything.
> We may think Dillon Fence and Superchunk and Dave Matthews are > famous, but they aren't.
If you want to talk "indie" bands. then Superchunk are probably the biggest in the world, save maybe Fugazi. And Pavement, if you want to call them an indie band. And maybe Sebadoh. But you get the idea.
Pearl Jam, Nirvana, STP, and friends simply are a different thing than indie bands. If you ask an indie rocker anywhere in the world, he will have heard of Superchunk. Anywhere. Option has derided "endless Superchunk clones in America's heartland" in its reviews. They've been in or mentioned in Sassy five times (that I've seen). A friend of an associate of mine bought "No Pocky for Kitty" in Vienna, for goodness sakes.
2000 miles away is probably Denver. I assure you all, they are huge in Denver. Gigantic. I have my finger on Denver's pulse.
But it is impossible, in our day of mass-marketing, to be an indie band and be truly famous, like say Pearl Jam or Dee Dee Meyers, at the same time. Can't happen. So Superchunk ain't famous in the world at large.
And also, "C. Von Speck" is Jeff Robins making fun of Messr Speck. Says so in the header.
What I think is really weird is a band like Small, who are probably bigger out of town than they are in it.
Chapel Hill has more indie famous bands per capita than any other city in the nation. Easily. By a factor of ten.
Yes, but all Mr. florin's math set out to prove was the fact that amongst indie rockers--who in the past made up a tiny, esoteric minority, but who now make up a much larger minority--Superchunk, mac McCaughan, and Merge records are amongst the top twenty or so most well-known entities.
For proof, one need look no further than a random sampling of national music magazines over the past few months.
to wit:
Spin Magazine, Dec. 1994:
page 78: 20 best albums of '94: #11: Superchunk, "foolish", with nice blurb by chuck aaron, the best writer spin as at moment
page 112: "Live!" review of solo Mac McCaughan show @ Maxwell's in Hoboken
p 109: review of new Lambchop LP, Merge records
p 78 (again): Magnetic Fields "charm of the highway strip" (merge) #18 of the top 20. if you're counting, that makes 2 merge releases in top 20 of 94--a distinction shared by only major labels like DGC, Mercury, Warners, and MCA.
Option Magazine, Nov/Dec 1994:
p 76: Mac McCaughan/Portastatic featured relatively prominently (two pictures) in article on Low-fi, one of only a half-dozen so featured.
p 136: review of Polvo's "celebrate the new dark age" (damn option take their time, eh) on Merge, of course
If I weren't sick with body cold, I'd dig thru some others.
Point is that you can't compare the current scene, Keith, Bob, with anything you've seen before because the face of the whole thing has changed--the lines of communication are wider, and while the vast majority of Americans do *not* know who Superchunk are, a sizeable, well-organized minority *do*.
did I mention that "superchunk" was runner-up name for a new element in an NPR contest?
So I say that nate's estimation of Superchunk/Merge axis as one of the most well-known aggressively indie bands/labels in country, second perhaps only to Fugazi, is dead on, *among those who care about such things*.
I'm sure that Garth Brooks is pretty well known among those who care about whatever he's into. compared to world population, the 4 million or so people who buy Garth's records vs the 40,000 who buy Superchunk's are not that far apart.
All depends on who you ask.
There will never *be* a next seattle. Indie rock *is* the "next seattle." regionalism has been exhausted--Seattle was just an anomaly, a place with a dozen sound-similar bands. big deal.
> I agree with Keith. I have been here the same length of time, and this > has all happened before, the bands come, the bands go, and not a lot > changes. I guess the proliferation of bb's helps spread a more immediate > word of mouth buzz but the bottom line is an Athens or Seattle is a > combination of forces that only has the capability of exploding for a > short time. Trying to make it happen will never work as I'm sure you all > know.
I know Chapel Hill won't be the mythic Next Seattle and that's not what I'm talking about. Among the indie rock world *RIGHT NOW* there is no town of a similar size with so many bands that are "big" in the indie rock world. Small, the Archers, Superchunk/Portastatic, and Polvo all consistently chart well at bunches of college radio stations throughout the country. No other town of 40,000 has that, and no other town of 40,000 has name recognition on the scale that we do here. Well, Olympia, Washington for sure does. But most all of the other big indie centers (Austin, New York, wherever... Halifax, NS for God's sake) are a lot bigger than Chapel Hill. Austin is ten times larger, Halifax twelve. New York a bazillion.
And Superchunk is the archetypal popular indie band. Right now.
But we'll never be the Next Seattle because I don't think the best local music is geared to that musically or spiritually, and I also don't think that the town is big enough. And nobody really wants it either--I'd hate for "Chapel Hill" to be the punchline of a joke told in Box Elder, Montana.
So to The World At Large Chapel Hell is well known because of Dean Smith, James Taylor, and Dean Smith and Dean Smith. And Kay Kyser among the oldster set.
But that's not what I'm talking about. Indie rockdom is a pretty limited world, but The Village is a very big fish in a very small pond. 100,000 music directors can't be wrong. Indie rock is multipolar and this here is a big ass pole.
I guess I would disagree with the new math submitted by Nate. The nearer you are to the stove, the hotter it feels. Outside where there are real lives Chapel Hill is virtually unknown outside of specialists, the hip, the hungry, the bad, and the ugly. In the 14 years that I've been here, there has always been a sense that "Chapel Hill was on the verge of being a new music mecca" and year after year great bands play, struggle, do great things and go almost unnoticed outside the fanzines, bulletin boards, word of mouth and XYC and XDU (and, sometimes, KNC). There are tons of other college towns, to, with the same phenom as here; we don't hear about them and their bands for the same reason they seldom hear out ours and ours.
Sorry to be a scrooge, but this view is fostered by too many years here and seeing too many great to good bands falter and freeze after super-hype at home and super-ambivalence at large.
Keith Weston
-- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % % % "I have heard the mermaids singing each to each. I do not think they % % will sing to me" --from "Prufrock" by T.S. Eliot %
>I guess I would disagree with the new math submitted by Nate. The nearer >you are to the stove, the hotter it feels. Outside where there are real >lives Chapel Hill is virtually unknown outside of specialists, the hip, >the hungry, the bad, and the ugly. In the 14 years that I've been here, >there has always been a sense that "Chapel Hill was on the verge of being >a new music mecca" and year after year great bands play, struggle, do >great things and go almost unnoticed outside the fanzines, bulletin >boards, word of mouth and XYC and XDU (and, sometimes, KNC). There are >tons of other college towns, to, with the same phenom as here; we don't >hear about them and their bands for the same reason they seldom hear out >ours and ours.
>Sorry to be a scrooge, but this view is fostered by too many years here >and seeing too many great to good bands falter and freeze after >super-hype at home and super-ambivalence at large.
I agree with Keith. I have been here the same length of time, and this has all happened before, the bands come, the bands go, and not a lot changes. I guess the proliferation of bb's helps spread a more immediate word of mouth buzz but the bottom line is an Athens or Seattle is a combination of forces that only has the capability of exploding for a short time. Trying to make it happen will never work as I'm sure you all know. What do you think Bill Burton you predate us both???
Sorry, Ross, I disagree. MTV came here circa 1985 and did a feature on the area with Dexter and several others of the time; and Other Bright Colors got some of the same kind of notices that Superchunk do now. The difference is that Superchunck in now and OBC was then. I could, also, dig up notices from Rolling Stone and the NY Times about this area which read like the Spin articles you mention. It's the same, only different.
Thanks and I do appreciate your opinions, ross, I just feel in this case you are wrong.
One slack motherfucker, Keith Weston
-- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % % % "I have heard the mermaids singing each to each. I do not think they % % will sing to me" --from "Prufrock" by T.S. Eliot %
Ross says:******** There will never *be* a next seattle. Indie rock *is* the "next seattle." regionalism has been exhausted--Seattle was just an anomaly, a place with a dozen sound-similar bands. big deal. ************************** I'll have to agree. It's amazing that the CH area has fostered the indie success that it has considering that the South East is most friendly to Jam oriented rock like the HORDE bands. Not to dis these guys at all, but the South has not been fertile ground for indie rock. Sure their was Athens, but that is over. Regionalism is an important issue for indie bands because bands like God and Texas have to keep day jobs to pay the bills. Sure they are signed to Resless, but they can't go on a major tour in support of their material and sustain momentum in the trenches of small clubs and audiences in parts of the country far from their region. I was just thinking of this because I was reading an article on them last night in Indie File. Maybe I should qualify my initial agreement and say that regionalism is still important for indie acts but is decreasing? What do you think? Harry Round up the usual suspects.
> Sorry, Ross, I disagree. MTV came here circa 1985 and did a feature on > the area with Dexter and several others of the time; and Other Bright > Colors got some of the same kind of notices that Superchunk do now. The > difference is that Superchunck in now and OBC was then.
No, the difference is twofold: first, *this* is now and that was then, then being back before every major label had its own "college radio" department, back before "alternative" was the new mainstream. Second, despite yr memory, Other Bright colors never released *five* critically acclaimed LPs, and/or received *consistent* coverage on their own merit, as opposed to being part of a "scene" package.
I could, also,
> dig up notices from Rolling Stone and the NY Times about this area which > read like the Spin articles you mention. It's the same, only different.
Like I just said. The articles I mentioned, unlike the old kind of articles you refer to, weren't about the area: they were about a single local band/label/guy. If I were to go thru my archives I could find a nice little stack of articles about "chapel hill", sure, but more importantly I could find your plain old basic attention being paid to Superchunk and Polvo on a regular basis, the kind of attention (esp, as Nate said, intertextual references to bands "heavily influenced by Polvo/superchunk") that indicate that these bands are part of the upper echelons of this phenom called indie rock.
that is, there is a *huge* fucking difference between the come-and-go "next seattle" coverage, which we have had our fair share of, and the kind of offhand reference to certain bands which indicates that the writers/editors in question feel comfortable assuming that their readers know who said bands are. sorry about that "fucking" up there. I'm not steamed up or anything.
> Thanks and I do appreciate your opinions, ross, I just feel in this case > you are wrong.
well, as a member of the 4th estate, as well as a relatively active critic of the media itself, I've gotta say I'm correct in stating that there is a substantial difference between the level *and type* (more importantly) of coverage received by, say, Flat Duo Jets (I know, cuz I've got clippings from when their first album came out, from Spin itself, no less) and Superchunk now.
All Nate and I are arguing is that within an increasingly large, increasingly well-defined submarket, this region's bands are as influential as any in the country. The number of people who drove to mergefest from the damn Northeast is indicative of something along those lines.
we're not trying to argue that Superchunk are on their way to becoming the next Pearl Jam. I'm trying to argue, in fact, that the kind of hype surrounding Seattle etc. is pretty much obsolete, focusing itself instead on genres (punk, for example) rather than regions now.
But the attention *within* the increasingly complex indie rock community paid to Superchunk, Polvo, and occasionally the Archers, is long-haul, important-founding-type-figures attention, not next-big-thing attention.
So while I respect your "I've seen this all before" thing, I respectfully submit that, well, you haven't.
spo...@email.unc.edu (Nate Florin!) writes: >I know Chapel Hill won't be the mythic Next Seattle and that's not what >I'm talking about. Among the indie rock world *RIGHT NOW* there is no town >of a similar size with so many bands that are "big" in the indie rock >world.
Uh huh, yep.
>Small, the Archers, Superchunk/Portastatic, and Polvo all >consistently chart well at bunches of college radio stations throughout >the country. No other town of 40,000 has that, and no other town of 40,000 >has name recognition on the scale that we do here.
Yes, absolutely, relative size and all, nicely put.
>Well, Olympia, Washington for sure does.
Ah, yes, good point. I think of it as our sister city, even though the communication between us seems negligible. When's Beat Happening gonna play here? What say we convince Oly bands and CH bands to road trip towards a central meeting point (Lawrence, KS?) and have a party?
>But most all of the other big indie centers >(Austin, New York, wherever... Halifax, NS for God's sake) are a lot >bigger than Chapel Hill. Austin is ten times larger, Halifax twelve. New >York a bazillion.
Yep amazing how this info gets forgotten in discussions, ain't it?
>And Superchunk is the archetypal popular indie band. Right now.
Yeah, and they're growing with each LP and spinning off side projects like water off a shaking dog. No offense meant, but what's interesting about Dischord and Fugazi these days? No really, I'm curious, you might know something I don't.
>. . . I'd hate for "Chapel Hill" to be the punchline of a joke told in >Box Elder, Montana.
Hee hee god Nate's good isn't he?
>So to The World At Large Chapel Hell is well known because of Dean Smith, >James Taylor, and Dean Smith and Dean Smith. And Kay Kyser among the >oldster set.
Kay Kyser! That should be a trivia question in the FAQ, with a free weekend at Ross' pad as the prize! Don't give it away now, anyone!
>But that's not what I'm talking about. Indie rockdom is a pretty limited >world, but The Village is a very big fish in a very small pond. 100,000 >music directors can't be wrong.
It may be a "limited world", Nate, but it's big enough to support a couple of generations, people from all over the globe, and talented artists in the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed (Burrito Bunker rules).
>Indie rock is multipolar and this here is a big ass pole.
Thanks, Ross. We'll both have to wait and see. I'll hold to my "this is sound and fury signifing nothing" until someone scores a certified gold record. They, I'll cave in.
Keith (I may have to cave in sooner than I think; however, I'm not optimistic)
-- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % % % "I have heard the mermaids singing each to each. I do not think they % % will sing to me" --from "Prufrock" by T.S. Eliot %
Greetings Chapel Hillians from the snowy land of the north (OK, Massachusetts),
Actually Superchunk is quite well-known up here, since both Boston's WFNX (think WHFS) and Providence's WBRU (which keeps on winning those so-important Rolling Stone best radio station polls) played "The First Part" quite a bit. Granted, yr average Boyz II Men fan probably is still in the dark, but that borderline indie-Alice in Chains audience has at least been exposed to them.
>Sorry I forgot to put a smiley on my last post for you Todd. I guess my >tongue-in-cheek did not come through. :)
Tongue-in-cheek? Ok, I guess. I still think you're a bit out of touch with the indie music world Nate and Ross and I are describing, Keith, based on your posts in this thread.
>Savvy or not, the fact >remains, that the music is not winning wide acceptance, although it is >meeting with great dissemination and outlets, which is a good thing.
You've got me confused here. My point was that what you're calling "wide acceptance" doesn't mean shit to the folks who like listening to and talking about indie music, including the indie music that comes out of this town.
>But, like most college towns, this area sometimes has a tendency to toot >its own horn too much.
I'm with you on this point, except I'd be more generous and call it complacency, rather than hint that it's an ego thing. Please note that it isn't Superchunk, the Archers, Small or Polvo talking up a storm on the net.
>The gold records was a joke. Thanks for taking the bait.
Call me gullible; I did it with Ross on that FAQ thread too. But I still think you're too hung up on outside definitions of what's happening around here.
todd now don't take this the wrong way but I feel compelled to mention that I haven't seen you at a local show in about two years morman
Todd said: what's interesting about Dischord and Fugazi these days, and since our young punk friends are gone, I have to remind everyone:
In On the Killtaker sold somewhere over 250,000 copies
Foolish sold mebbe 30,000
Both with virtually identical label structures. The kids dig Fugazi for some reason, and the fact that none of us can figure out what's so interesting about them means that in a certain sense Keith is right to say we've got our heads shoved a little too far up certain asses.
our own, other peoples, whatever.
having said that, I have to say I don't know why Fugazi sell so many rekkids other than marketing (via massive word of mouth) to disenfranchised youth, a market that Superchunk are too subtle to hit really well?
Oh yeah. I was sitting there grading papers and something Bill Burton said a few days ago popped back into my head. He said something like: "if you expect to be compensated for the work you do, you're a capitalist."
and it occurred to me that in real terms, the two or three activities I pursue most avidly are contributing to this discussion group, preparing for and doing my show, taking photos, putting out this R. Hell comp--none of which I expect (though I'm sure I'd like) any compensation for.
so I guess the answer, Bill, is No, I'm not a capitalist, which is what I said to begin with.
On Wed, 21 Dec 1994, Todd Morman wrote: > >Well, Olympia, Washington for sure does.
> Ah, yes, good point. I think of it as our sister city, even though the > communication between us seems negligible. When's Beat Happening gonna > play here?
Funny story time. A couple of years ago (1992?) a local scenester associate of mine went to see Beat Happening in Washington, DC (or maybe it was New York...) and asked Calvin this same question. He said, "We would, but we just played there!" After a confused discussion it turned out BH played somewhere in town in 1987 and thought it was "too early" to come back, five years later.
Aren't they "on hiatus" now?
> What say we convince Oly bands and CH bands to road trip > towards a central meeting point (Lawrence, KS?) and have a party?
Lawrence is a great town. A lot like Chapel Hill, except that I think they have a Wal Mart. Even a Dean Smith disciple coaching the local basketball team. They have a radioactive lake, though, which I believe is something we are short of. They have our Merge pals, Butterglory, too.
> Yeah, and they're growing with each LP and spinning off side projects > like water off a shaking dog. No offense meant, but what's interesting > about Dischord and Fugazi these days? No really, I'm curious, you might > know something I don't.
"Not much?" That's what I'd say. They have an ethic that everyone should liberally steal, but so do Merge and K and...
In article <9412221608.AA07...@cc00du.unity.ncsu.edu>,
<ch-sc...@gibbs.oit.unc.edu> wrote: >Todd said: what's interesting about Dischord and Fugazi these days, and >since our young punk friends are gone, I have to remind everyone:
>In On the Killtaker sold somewhere over 250,000 copies
>Foolish sold mebbe 30,000
>Both with virtually identical label structures. The kids dig Fugazi for >some reason, and the fact that none of us can figure out what's so
Hmm. I thought it was because Fugazi rocks. At least, my ass is kicked by them.
There definitely is a Movement associated iwth it, whcih (dyslexic, much?) 'Chunque won't hit. One thing, In On The Killtaker came out a year or more before Foolish. Wait, 8-9 months? The Spin blurb (talkin' about Foolish, now; can make any less sense?) will add a buncha those Xmas sales.
Fan until Mac is referred to in alt.indiepop.thoughtful-lyrics like Ian is in alt.punk.straightedge, there just ain't no Movement dango
>Both with virtually identical label structures. The kids dig Fugazi for >some reason, and the fact that none of us can figure out what's so >interesting about them means that in a certain sense Keith is right to >say we've got our heads shoved a little too far up certain asses.
>our own, other peoples, whatever.
>having said that, I have to say I don't know why Fugazi sell so many >rekkids other than marketing (via massive word of mouth) to >disenfranchised youth, a market that Superchunk are too subtle to hit >really well?
Having the "founding father" of American punk (DC subversion) in your band certainly can't hurt. Plus, they kick ass! Their shows are revelations, in my book. But the "founding father" thing is also important. Talking with Jawbox, you'd think that they'd have been in a position to sell a lot of records on Dischord, but it didn't really happen. A lot of it is Fugazi's legendary status (a little is their notoriety for their anti-marketing) and it's mostly because they shred. Butch
"You gotta have a real love in your heart for people to do this to them"-Susan Atkins
