• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Onion interviews Billy Corgan

Status
Not open for further replies.

Diablos

Member
http://www.theonionavclub.com/feature/index.php?issue=4126

Probably the best one yet.

The Onion: With the exception of the time he was kicked out of Smashing Pumpkins, Jimmy Chamberlin has always been your drummer. Is there a reason why he's not playing with you now?

Billy Corgan: The way we look at it is, me and him together, it's Pumpkins. We were the bulk of all the recording for the Pumpkins, except for Adore, and even trying to be in Zwan, it became almost like a farce, where other band members would be saying, "That sounds like the Pumpkins." And we'd be like "No shit." We were spending energy trying not to sound like we sound. So we've kind of just come to the conclusion, if we're going to work together, it's Pumpkins. Because that's the sound. When you hear us play together, that's the sound.

O: You've had some pretty tumultuous relationships with other band members in the past. Do you think you'll ever be in a band again?

BC: It's pretty simple for me—if I'm ever going to be in a band concept again, it would be Pumpkins. As far as running the show: People can imagine what it's like, me running things. It's nowhere near as crazy as people would picture. But that being said, I pretty much always run the show anyway, so it's not tremendously different. Ultimately, running a band is about the relationships you have with people. Most of my arguments with musicians through the years have had more to do with their attitude about music, or their attitude about their own lives, or their personal responsibility. Music has never really been the big centerpiece of the fight.

O: But now that you're working under your own name, you have the freedom to record and perform with whomever you want.

BC: Yeah, that's what's somewhat frustrating about being in a band. If you have a different vision, you kind of—at one point, I had gone to James Iha and said, "You know, there's just so much guitar work going on. What do you think about bringing out another guitar player on the road, not to be in the band, just to add to some of the guitar-playing?" And he was like, "No way." So we spent a lot of time, just me and him, trying to figure out how to carry the load of like 50 guitar overdubs between the two of us. So yeah, you get into the politics of, like, if somebody can't do something, or there's something you want to do, what are you supposed to do? I tried to stay pretty faithful to that when I was in the Pumpkins, and that was frustrating at times.

O: Now that you've had time to look back on Smashing Pumpkins and Zwan, do you see any recurring themes behind the breakups? Do you blame yourself at all?

BC: If you can sort of sit and look evenly at both the Zwan experience and the Pumpkins experience, when the relationships in Zwan started to break down for the right reasons—because people were lying and there were drugs involved and there were total falsehoods presented—I got out. In the Pumpkins, when I reached that crossroads, I just covered it up. I think if you can see both situations evenly, I was dealing in both cases with extremely dysfunctional people, but the difference in the situations is that in the second case, I chose not to deal with it; in the first case, by choosing to deal with it, I created a whole other host of problems. For example, if you've read any of my online biography stuff, we at different times tried to deal with Jimmy's drug issues in different ways. At certain points we put our foot down and we said, "You gotta get help, or you're going to get fired." At other points, we just looked the other way, because we were in the middle of a tour, and it was just like, "Let's just get to the next city and to the next show." When those problems reared their head in Zwan, I said, "I'm outta here." Since this article is about me, if you wanted to draw anything from me about it, it's that I put myself in situations with people who are highly talented but highly dysfunctional, and I think that says something about me. But at the end of the day, I've been the rocket fuel. It's been my songs, it's been my pushing. At times I pushed for good reasons, and at times I pushed for bad reasons. But I still felt no matter what the situation, at least my focus was music. I produced the music. And you can look at anybody else that I've worked with, and there's just not that consistency there, you know?

O: As for the people you've been working with recently, have you consciously steered clear of the things that caused problems with others in the past?

BC: Everybody I'm working with now is a friend. And I would be very, very remiss to work with anybody in the future who has not shown me who they really are. Like in Zwan, I took people's words for people's characters, and that really burned me bad. At least with James and D'arcy [Wretzky] and Jimmy, despite whatever their issues were—and mine included—we got to know each other in a van and we got to know who we were over time, long before the band ever blew up and got big. So at least I knew who they were, and I knew what their boundaries were, or lack of boundaries were. But with Zwan, it was like, "Hello!" Jack-in-the-box shit. "Hi, I am a junkie." "Oh really? Didn't know."

O: It sounds like you could see yourself going back with the Pumpkins.

BC: No, I think the relationships with James and D'arcy are pretty poor. I haven't spoken to D'arcy in over six years. And James, I don't think I've spoken to him in almost four. So I wouldn't be counting them in on the reunion tour anytime soon.

O: How did you approach the writing and production of TheFutureEmbrace, compared to your previous records?
"I put myself in situations with people who are highly talented but highly dysfunctional, and I think that says something about me. But at the end of the day, I've been the rocket fuel. It's been my songs, it's been my pushing."

BC: The same. I think long and hard about what it is I'm actually trying to do, and then I kind of have to narrow my focus into that. If I don't, I'm too all over the place. So in this one, it was pretty simple—it was like, "I'm not going to do alternative guitar rock because I've been there. If I do that, it sounds like Smashing Pumpkins, and I don't feel strongly about that particular way of doing business right now." So it was like, "I want to force myself out of my comfort zone into new territory, and I just have to deal."

O: TheFutureEmbrace has a very strong electronic element, which you explored with the Pumpkins to a lesser extent. What attracts you to electronic sounds?

BC: It's just like colors. I like this sound of the color, or the color of the sound—I like the feelings that they evoke. The fact that it gets political, that doesn't interest me, but in terms of a sonic painting, I really like the choices.

O: What do you mean by "political"?

BC: Well, I'm known as a guitar-rock guy, you know? You're not supposed to play with synthesizers. This is not in the rulebook. And if you are, you're supposed to kind of stay simple.

O: When Adore came out, didn't you say something about the guitar dying?

BC: No, what I was trying to say—and maybe I said it poorly at the time—is that the notion of using the guitar as a dangerous, evocative statement was sort of running out of gas, that it was becoming a stock, parcel, go-to move. When we were playing loud in 1989, and the Sub Pop bands and stuff, that was shocking. There was a shocking quality to young, alternative people with funny haircuts playing as loud as any heavy-metal band, you know? It was shocking to see Nirvana play, because it was like, "Here's this little guy with a monster-guitar sound." And it was heavier than Black Sabbath. That was shocking.

And around the mid-'90s, it stopped being shocking, as every hair guy who would have been in a hair-metal band got his tattoos and suddenly decided he was alternative. It just became like a thing. So what I was saying was, it's becoming a thing, and from the alternative world, the alternative mindset, if you want to move forward, you're gonna have to figure out a way to move beyond this thing. And you know, you've seen some people do it with post-rock—the devotees of Neu!, the Tortoise kind of crews, and stuff like that—doing their kind of stripped-down thing. Now you see kids coming back around shoegazing stuff—My Bloody Valentine and Slowdive and all that. You slowly see people finding the guitar in a new way that's not like Limp Bizkit seventh generation down, and I just draw that distinction because, unfortunately, the media doesn't anymore. "Alternative" is like any band with tattoos, and the bad hair, and the sound is alternative. It's no longer defined by who is actually on the cutting edge of alternative, so this is the problem that I have.

O: How did Bjorn Thorsrud and Bon Harris' production work influence the sound of TheFutureEmbrace?

BC: We kind of fell into basic roles—Bjorn's job was to figure out how to sonically represent what I was looking for, and him and Bon worked very closely to do that. Bon's job was to handle the electronic-manipulating part of things, and also to kind of contribute—he's been studying classical scoring for, like, the last four years, and so we worked this different way where he would take pieces and sort of adapt them, and then give them back to me, and we'd work from that point of view. So he did the electronics and sort of the re-adaptation of the pieces, and then my job was to be the front-end guy and the back-end guy. I generate the material, kind of leave it to them to muck around with, and go off and write some more. Then they'd present me something halfway down the line, I'd make some suggestions, and then we'd go from there. We'd either kill it, or we'd readapt it, or—it was a bit clinical, but it was pretty effective.

O: By leaving alternative guitar rock off TheFutureEmbrace, you avoided a genre that you more or less defined in the '90s. Do you want to avoid that period for now?

BC: Oh, no, I'm very proud of not only what we did, but what a lot of the bands of my peerage did. I'm really proud of the work of Alice In Chains and Soundgarden and Nirvana and Hole, and even Nine Inch Nails. I'm very proud of that generation. I'm still critical of how people are kind of continuing on, and I still think we have a lot to offer, so I'm looking forward, hopefully, to different people stepping up and getting it done. But I'm very proud, very glad to be associated with that time. I think it was a special time.

O: The Pumpkins headlined Lollapalooza in 1994, which was one of the last times that alt-rock still felt important, powerful, and promising. Was that summer a daunting time for you?

BC: Yes, totally overwhelming. Particularly, Lollapalooza was very difficult for me, because I was sort of still on the idealism that the world was going to change, however naïve that was. And playing in front of 42 crowds on that tour and realizing that the mainstream was just going to pervert this thing for what they wanted it for. It was a temporary flirtation. I think it was similar for the people of the '60s—I don't think '90s music was as significant as '60s music in terms of changing the world, but it was significant, and I think it was similarly disillusioning when you realize the mainstream just views it as like a curiosity. They're not really getting it. They're there with their khakis and their beer, and they want to hear the hit—that's really not about changing things. That was very hard for me to see, and I think I dealt with that period of my life pretty poorly, because it pissed me off. I thought, "Wow, here's a great chance, and it's just the same shit." And it's proven pretty much to be true. Alternative music has been co-opted by the mainstream; it's now used in commercials, and everybody's got their cuddly, cute, funny looks. It's what the mainstream does—they absorb things and they blunt the power of it. And so the next generation and the next generation has to become more shocking and more provocative in order to get any rise out of anybody.

O: How do you feel about all the Pumpkins imitators?

BC: The musical part of it doesn't bother me. What bothers me more is the social and cultural part of it. What bothers me is when music becomes entertainment. Of course, music is supposed to be entertaining, but go back to any period of time—music had a cultural significance on different levels, whether it was folk music, it was the news of the village, or it had to do with the rites of passage. Music is supposed to be interwoven into the fabric of society; it is not supposed to be a plaything that is there to serve the population's titillation of the moment. And when, particularly, alternative music—which is supposed to be the standard-bearer of where white rock is headed—becomes either too cute or too manufactured, that's just really not good. And there seems to be almost kind of a blasé, "Well, that's just the way that it is now." It's like a shrugging of the shoulders: "Well, we used to believe in Sonic Youth and all that promise, but, well, gee, it's not going to happen." I don't buy that. Whether it's the social activism of Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, or Jimi Hendrix's race-bending blues, or whatever, that's what it's there for: it's supposed to be entertaining and challenging, and when it just becomes entertaining, it's like, "Whoa, that's scary." Because music saved my life, you know, and I've had many people tell me that my music and other bands have saved their lives, and when it loses that social import, when it stops being this important thing and it just literally becomes about box-office returns, that's fucked-up. I'm not comfortable with that. And it was that summer of '94 that it hit me—it was like, "Fuck, this is not going to work."

O: When you say that you felt that the alternative nation was going to change the world, what exactly did that mean to you?
"I see the effects of what we did in Europe, and it's changing the way people are making music in India and China, and so it has a touchstone there. But America seems to take everything pure and turn it into some sort of fucked-up simulacrum."

BC: I think that the hope is that when you present people with things from the heart and from the soul, they make better choices: They make better choices about their bodies, they make better choices about their partners, they make better choices about the environment. It should have a tumbling-down effect. And here we are: If Nirvana's "Teen Spirit" was the moment of epiphany for mass culture about alternative rock, and 14 years later we're looking at a completely right-wing society, that didn't really fulfill that promise. I do feel in hindsight that we did change the world—ultimately, maybe we changed more the other parts of the world, and America just kind of absorbed us into their dumb story. But I see the effects of what we did in Europe, and it's changing the way people are making music in India and China, and so it has a touchstone there. But America seems to take everything pure and turn it into some sort of fucked-up simulacrum.

O: Is that why you've decided not to play any old songs?

BC: The reason I don't play any of the old songs is because I really honor my old band, and I think that those songs are best served within the context of that band. That doesn't mean I'll never play those songs again, and it doesn't mean I have to have four Pumpkins onstage—the last two albums of the Pumpkins, we only had three Pumpkins onstage at any given time, except for one brief period. This is me resisting other people's definition of what my music, my life in music, and my songs, should be.

There comes a point where being overly identified with [a certain period of time] becomes a noose around your neck, and people don't want you to grow up, they don't want you to change, they don't want you to evolve. But how do they think I became that guy in the first place? I evolved out of—I mean, I was playing heavy metal when I was 18. I had to evolve out of that into an alternative consciousness about what it meant to change the way I played guitar, and the kind of songs, and the subject matter, and singing about child abuse, and all this stuff. I had to come from somewhere, and I had to take chances to do that. So it's very hard for someone to tell me, "Hey, stop, don't move forward." Moving forward is how I got somewhere, and it's how I'm going to get to the next destination. At the end of the day, it might just be a big circle—I might just be going through all this stuff to come back around and go, "You know what? I just want to play my thing." I have not played my style of rock literally since 1997. So I've spent the last eight years down in a diamond mine trying to figure out a different way to do this. And I think I've finally figured it out. And it doesn't mean that what I'm doing on TheFutureEmbrace is the thing, is the blueprint, but it sort of shows me different ways to see sunshine.

So in terms of the live-concert experience, if I'm not willing to fully walk out on that pier and be totally in the moment of what I'm doing now, it becomes about service, it becomes about being servile to something that's not even of my own creation. I mean, yeah, I created it, but it's the other people's impression of what that should be. Let's say I wanted to get up onstage tomorrow and play Smashing Pumpkins songs, but I wanted to play three obscure songs that no one had ever heard 'cause they were on B-sides. Everyone would be yelling at me that I wasn't playing "those songs," so you just draw a hard line in the sand and you say, "No. Not now." And you deal with it. You deal with it in terms of you don't sell as many tickets maybe in this particular place, maybe you don't sell as many T-shirts, maybe some fan leaves the concert and says, "Fuck you, I'm never listening again." That's the chance I'm willing to take, because I believe that when I get to where I want to be, it'll be strong enough that they'll come back around. That's how I made those records in the first place—taking that chance. So just because I'm 38, and just because everybody's out doing their reunion tours and all, and it's got a formula—I'm not that guy. They asked me on MTV, "What about a Pumpkins reunion?" And I said it pretty simple: "If you ever see it, it ain't gonna be like what you think it's gonna be. It ain't gonna be those lighters in the air and everybody la-la-la-ing along." I was in a dangerous band, and I liked being in a dangerous band, and I never thought I wouldn't be in that dangerous band. So if I ever go back to it, it's gonna be dangerous. It's not going to be gingerbread cookies and milk.

O: You admit that TheFutureEmbrace was influenced by everyone from David Bowie to Echo & The Bunnymen to Joy Division. As an established artist, is it easier to talk about your influences and incorporate them into what you're doing now?

BC: Yeah. And I think it's important—I really think it's a white, bourgeois idea to pretend that you don't have influences. It seems to be the obsession strictly of white people in college. Like, "You know, I just rolled out of bed and I had this idea." It's wonderful to read interviews by old blues guys—they talk about all their influences, they talk about who taught them how to play, and who they saw, and how they were determined to play that way. Why is it this weird white problem that we must pretend we are the genius? I really feel like I'm standing on the shoulders of some pretty big giants, and I'm really happy that I'm at that point in my life where I'm totally willing to cop to whatever. Because it is homage, because I do know how to make my own sound, so if I choose to sort of tip my cap to somebody else, that's because it's choice, it's not because I don't have a choice.

O: "Mina Loy (M.O.H.)" was inspired by your fear about a dirty bomb hitting Chicago. Do you think about that kind of thing a lot?

BC: All the time. I was in New York on 9/11—I was 10 blocks away, so I heard that plane going over. I was up in my living room reading a self-help book, and until you've heard a 747—or whatever it was, a 767—go over your head... I mean, it was right over the building, 'cause it was so low. And to have been there and heard that sound, know that those people were in there, and heard the plane crash, and seen the damage, and seeing people screaming in the streets covered in ash, to have witnessed that personally, I don't think that ever leaves you. And my experience was tangential—I wasn't standing there. I didn't lose anybody.

It makes me crazy to think that somebody might attack my city or any other city. It used to be like, "Well, they'd have to get in a plane or they'd have to launch a missile, and if they launched a missile, we'd blow them up and the whole world would blow up." This idea that there's some jerk-off sneaking around with a dirty bomb somewhere freaks me out. Because I know how stupid people can be. I've played in front of 5,000 people that bought a ticket to my concert, and some guy who's bought a ticket decides he's going to throw a bottle at my head. That's a simple act of stupidity. That's not even defiance. And when you think of how many whackos there are out in the world, it's frightening to me that we may end up in these really unbelievable situations that I think we can't even mentally reconcile.

O: As you're getting older and playing a young man's game, how do you avoid losing your edge?

BC: That's a good question, and I'm not avoiding it, but I would say it's this simple: Change the game. The game as it's billed, as it's commonly understood, is a young man's game for a reason: because that's the age that people are exploited, exploitable, and they're easily manipulated. The problem with me is, you can't manipulate me anymore. I've seen it, I know it, I've been there. And that's partially why, particularly in America, you see issues with artists as they get older. And they like to keep it a young man's game. Because that's how they can fudge around with the rules. So my thing now is, I'm gonna change the game, and I am changing the game. It may not be obvious at this point, and it may be more obvious in a couple years, but I'm gonna change this game.

I know, I know, you wanna laugh at the part where he talks about changing things in China or whatever. By "we" he meant not only his band but the whole early 90's alt. rock movement.

Lots of things said in the interview make sense, though.
 

Macam

Banned
Thanks for the interview, certainly some interesting things there. I particularly liked his stance on alternative and it's something I agree with; there was certainly a brief point in time when Alternative meant something. Now it's everything. It's also amusing to see how he considers him and Jimmy SP, as while I don't necessarily diagree entirely, I think James, at least to me, certainly had a big hand in that sound.

I'll start a pool on how long 'til the trolls roll in.
 

Diablos

Member
Ignore them. That's what I'm doing, please do the same.

Anyway, yeah, I guess James did have a big hand, and everyone blames Corgan for him not doing enough. But Billy wanted ANOTHER guitarist in the band, James rejected it. James never really wanted to do much in the studio or live, and it showed. I mean, James really pushed himself in '99-00 and he seemed like a completely different guitarist (and in a good way). It's too bad he didn't try that hard before. The band would be different if Jimmy and Billy are the only two original people. And according to what he said in this interview, it seems like there's a good chance of it being that way. :(

By the way, some Netphorians are saying that Brain Liesegang is going to play bass for the Pumpkins. Wasn't he in Nine Inch Nails?

brian23fq.jpg


He looks like a pretty cool guy.
 

Azih

Member
Really nice point about why young artists are the ones that get the big push. It's always wierded me out that Adult Contemporary type radio stations pump out Avril Lavigne all the time. I mean hell, it's fine for a certain young demographic so why is it freaking everywhere?
 

Diablos

Member
He was also right when he talked about the flawed "alternative nation." I mean, Smells Like Teen Spirit was supposed to be this defining song that shaped culture (and it did, to an extent), but fast forward 15 years and that all fell apart. That sense of true integrity in music is pretty much dead unless you're an indie band, or artist that's around the age of Corgan (or whatever Cobain would be right now). Neither of which get the recognition they deserve. Music is entertainment in this country, and nothing more. You have to try harder if you want to listen to anything else. I hate being picky about bands, I hate it. I wish it wasn't like that. All the right bands aren't popular, all the worthless insignificant ones get all the attention in the world. And this doesn't even just go for more underground bands anymore, I'm even talking about ones with the mainstream intention. For every record Velvet Revolver has sold, Oceansize should've sold 5 more. But you can't even hope for that anymore.

ArcadeStickMonk: C'mon, I'm a diehard Pumpkins fan and even I will admit that Darcy was not a very good bassist - well, she was, but she didn't care to keep on top of her playing. And so it means the same thing at the end of the day. The Pumpkins' music deserves a better bassist on stage. Auf dur Maur played a big role in making the guitar during their final tour so amazing.
 
I think he spent a short amount of time in Nine Inch Nails before starting Filter with Richard Patrick. I read the first couple questions of that interview...
 

Diablos

Member
I see. I was about to say, NIN *IS* Trent Reznor in every way possible, it's not even like the Pumpkins where Chamberlin can take a lot of credit for shaping the band's sound and direction. NIN = Trent Reznor, heh.

It will be interesting to see who they pick as a guitarist if they can't get James to join (which would suck). I wonder if distantmantra has any idea :D
 
No James, no sale. Well okay, total sale, but I won't be happy about it!

I mean, if James is out, then Corgan will just get some pawn who will play what Corgan tells him to play. I doubt the new members will have any creative input...ffs.

Edit: Diablos, maybe you should make an official Corgan thread or something, because until the Pumpkins actually reform, there's going to be new info (that is, Corgan spouting smoke screen bullshit) every week right up until they do reform.
 

Diablos

Member
It sounds arrogant but all you really need is Billy and Jimmy. No James would definitely take the band's chemistry down to a level that's pretty much brand new, but they can adapt. It's not like James wrote most of the band's songs.

Optimistic: Good point.

Admins, can you change the title of this topic to "Official Smashing Pumpkins thread" so we can just update this instead of making 100 new threads every time there's a bunch of new info? Thanks.
 

Macam

Banned
My thing with James is that even being the subdued kind of personality that he is, he has real talent, especially when he contributes to songwriting or just does it on his own. Unfortunately, I haven't really heard anything come out of him since 1998 or post-Adore SP in terms of contributions, and while I have no qualms with Corgan dominating his outfits, Iha rounded out things to me. His contributions were few and far between, but they were noteworthy to me.

That said, if James doesn't join, and I suspect he won't at this point if the reunion ever gets off the ground, I won't be as upset as if Jimmy weren't part of it. That man is a machine. I threw in the Earphoria DVD and let Silverfuck/Jackboot rip....what I would've given to be in London for that one.
 

Diablos

Member
Dross? Don't you mean Jackboot? :D

Yeah, the thing is, Jimmy gets better like every time he comes out of the studio. I wouldn't say he reinvents himself, but his playing just gets tighter and tighter. The scary thing is, he already was amazing, even for Gish. It's also kind of scary how he never played drums for a rock band before the Pumpkins, but was still such a natural fit for the band's sound, even for Gish.
 

Megafoo Chavez

I love EGM
these interviews with billy sadly remind of a guy who dumped his awesome girlfriend, talked a bunch of shit about her, and now years later realizes that she was the best thing he ever had and wants her back but it isn't ever going to happen.
 

Macam

Banned
Most girls would probably come back if their ex-boyfriends placed an ad in the paper though. $37,000 ads to be precise. I agree otherwise.

Oh, and I just re-DLed the Gravity Demos (which is effectively the Mellon Collie tracks and B-sides, but instrumental), and I completely forgot how warm these songs were. New Wave Echo/Germans in Leather Pants would've made a grand fleshed out B-side.
 

White Man

Member
Diablos said:
Music is entertainment in this country, and nothing more. You have to try harder if you want to listen to anything else. I hate being picky about bands, I hate it. I wish it wasn't like that. All the right bands aren't popular, all the worthless insignificant ones get all the attention in the world. And this doesn't even just go for more underground bands anymore, I'm even talking about ones with the mainstream intention. For every record Velvet Revolver has sold, Oceansize should've sold 5 more. But you can't even hope for that anymore.

Diablos, I'm making an honest effort not to antagonize people in music threads, but can you honestly believe that pop music could have any profound effect on anything that matters? Pop music is a set of media put on the market to occupy young people, and give them something to spend dollars on. Before rampant capitalism, pop music didn't exist.

The "right" bands aren't popular because the bands that are popular have been (mostly) chosen to make it, mostly because they can effectively target a larger blanket demographic than their competition.

The SoundScan record sales tracking system was launched in 1991 or 1992, right around the time when Nirvana hit it big. Note that this was the last time a left-field act ever exploded unexpectedly. Due to sophisticated pop sales tracking, labels could hone in on the next big thing, buy them out, and have them degrading and homogenizing their sound months before they evem start getting any major airplay. Everything in made safe before it reaches the ears of the masses.

The way the music industry works is as sound as any math -- it's not difficult to predict what teens and young adults will do once you have their spending habits put down in front of you.
 

isamu

OMFG HOLY MOTHER OF MARY IN HEAVEN I CANT BELIEVE IT WTF WHERE ARE MY SEDATIVES AAAAHHH
Diablos said:
It sounds arrogant but all you really need is Billy and Jimmy. No James would definitely take the band's chemistry down to a level that's pretty much brand new, but they can adapt. It's not like James wrote most of the band's songs.

Optimistic: Good point.

Admins, can you change the title of this topic to "Official Smashing Pumpkins thread" so we can just update this instead of making 100 new threads every time there's a bunch of new info? Thanks.

Excellent point D. Just look at what Robert Smith has done with the Cure. He kicked out just about everybody and kept only Simon the guitarist and the fucking drummer, who was already a newbie to begin with. Yet, they're still calling the band The Cure.
 

ToxicAdam

Member
Hey, I'm just thankful that 1992-1995 happened. I won't sit and bitch about what was, or what could have been. It was a great explosion of music, maybe to never be duplicated again.
 

Diablos

Member
White Man: No, I disagree (not entirely, I see some of the points you have made). Music is so formulatic today it's sick. It's never been this manufactured. Shit, even in the 80's, all of those one hit wonder bands sucked, but at least a lot of them were TRYING to sound different.

Megafoo Chavez said:
these interviews with billy sadly remind of a guy who dumped his awesome girlfriend, talked a bunch of shit about her, and now years later realizes that she was the best thing he ever had and wants her back but it isn't ever going to happen.

Like Macam said, if you spend $75,000 on two ads in a newspaper saying the Pumpkins are getting back together, it will happen. It's not a matter of if, but when and how.

Besides, Corgan isn't dumb. His solo album is tanking, worse than Zwan (only ~30,000 copies in its first week; to compare, Zwan sold ~300,000 in its first week), but even before this he had to figure out that reforming the Pumpkins is the only thing that's going to keep his career in check in the long run.
 
White Man said:
Diablos, I'm making an honest effort not to antagonize people in music threads, but can you honestly believe that pop music could have any profound effect on anything that matters? Pop music is a set of media put on the market to occupy young people, and give them something to spend dollars on. Before rampant capitalism, pop music didn't exist.

The "right" bands aren't popular because the bands that are popular have been (mostly) chosen to make it, mostly because they can effectively target a larger blanket demographic than their competition.

The SoundScan record sales tracking system was launched in 1991 or 1992, right around the time when Nirvana hit it big. Note that this was the last time a left-field act ever exploded unexpectedly. Due to sophisticated pop sales tracking, labels could hone in on the next big thing, buy them out, and have them degrading and homogenizing their sound months before they evem start getting any major airplay. Everything in made safe before it reaches the ears of the masses.

The way the music industry works is as sound as any math -- it's not difficult to predict what teens and young adults will do once you have their spending habits put down in front of you.

I painfully agree with you and it saddens me to no end. The music industry is so shallow.
 
The Experiment said:
Wait, so Corgan wanted to change the world?

::Tries to hold back laughter:: Oh wait, I can't

:lol


You know, for all the shit Corgan gets, at least he has the drive and wholeheartedly believes that he, and other musicians, can change the world. I surely prefer his vantage point, though it may be naive, to that of jaded, cynical, lazy 'indie' fucktards who are content with doing as little as possible. Corgan wanted SP to be the biggest band in the world, and for a brief period in time it's arguable that they were. Is there anything wrong with that?
 
Star Power said:
You know, for all the shit Corgan gets, at least he has the drive and wholeheartedly believes that he, and other musicians, can change the world. I surely prefer his vantage point, though it may be naive, to that of jaded, cynical, lazy 'indie' fucktards who are content with doing as little as possible. Corgan wanted SP to be the biggest band in the world, and for a brief period in time it's arguable that they were. Is there anything wrong with that?

I see nothing wrong with that, for a while he did meet his goals. Unfortunately, he is not as relevant as he once was and has some problems understanding that.
 

Koopa

Member
Too many suits telling him he is Bono.

Nice move Diablo's, pretty classy I must say. Jumped all over a Corgan burp to pump your opinions to fold.

Its the weekly Pumpkins chat with your smarmy host Diablos

:::: Cue the clapping and cheering track :::::

Do you enter from the left or right and, with a slight pause.... beg mercy on your soul!!!
 

Diablos

Member
distantmantra said:
I see nothing wrong with that, for a while he did meet his goals. Unfortunately, he is not as relevant as he once was and has some problems understanding that.
It's just his attitude, he's always been overconfident. I think Corgan makes it pretty well known that things aren't the way they used to be for him. It's true, he does set himself up to look a little silly sometimes and there is no arguing this ("the world needs my band, I will succumb to it, blah blah blah" was retarded, "my fans and alternative rock need my band" would have been better), but like I said, it's his overconfidence. But that same overconfidence is what made the Pumpkins so great, and if Corgan didn't have that, they would've broke up after trying to make their second album.

Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Pumpkins, Alice in Chains, Nine Inch Nails, etc. - all of these bands were "the best bands in the world" for a short moment of time. It's just the way the early/mid 90's was. They didn't slow down, and they were talented enough to keep their shit innovative and fresh while moving at a considerably fast pace. I think it's because ultimately they were all smart enough to realize that rarely can a group of really talented bands control the mainstream for an extended period of time, but on the other hand, that won't last forever for obvious reasons. In the early 90's, these bands didn't need to work hard to get attention, the fans came running to them. It still happens today I suppose, but it's all marketed and hyped up and made so easy for kids to get into, especially with the Internet. It wasn't like that back then, plus you have to consider how much more diverse these bands were, not to mention they actually had something called integrity. Diversity and integrity in rock (well, any) music is basically shunned today, it's all the same shit.

Anyway, guys, consider this the official Smashing Pumpkins/Corgan thread until an admin is kind enough to change the title to just that.
 

Macam

Banned
Bono is buried, admirably, in politics. Corgan is buried, admirably, in music and the politics thereof. Two very different things.

I have no qualms with egos, provided they're backed with accordingly. U2 may not be what they once were, but I take no complaints with Bono or Corgan. The world could always use more good men and good musicians.
 

Diablos

Member
By the way, http://www.soundopinions.net/ is gonna be interviewing Corgan on the 5th. It's a two hour program, and it airs at 10PM Central every Tuesday. It's a great show, I've listened to it quite often throughout the year. They often have really interesting guests and most importantly, discussion.

Unfortunately you gotta play it in Internet Exploder, but it's a simple AOL streaming app and is harmless (no spyware or anything like that).
 

JPRaup

Banned
someone on another site wanted me to post this


Some of the interesting quotes.

"I liked being in a dangerous band, and I never thought I wouldn't be in that dangerous band. So if I ever go back to it, it's going to be dangerous. It's not going to be gingerbread cookies and milk."- yes, billy the Smashing Pumpkins were oh so fucking dangerous.

We can safely assume this interview was done about 2-3 weeks before Corgan made his Tribune emouncment.



Has their ever been a more naive person in music? Alt-rock was not radical or revolutionary Billy.

O: The Pumpkins headlined Lollapalooza in 1994, which was one of the last times that alt-rock still felt important, powerful, and promising. Was that summer a daunting time for you?

BC: Lollapalooza was very difficult for me, because I was sort of still on the idealism that the world was going to change. And playing in front of 42 crowds on that tour and realizing that the mainstream was just going to pervert this thing for what they wanted it for. It was a temporary flirtation. I think it was similar for the people of the '60s—I don't think '90s music was as significant as '60s music in terms of changing the world, but it was significant, and I think it was similarly disillusioning when you realize the mainstream just views it as like a curiosity.


O: When you say that you felt that the alternative nation was going to change the world, what exactly did that mean to you?

"I see the effects of what we did in Europe, and it's changing the way people are making music in India and China, and so it has a touchstone there. But America seems to take everything pure and turn it into some sort of fucked-up simulacrum."

And here we are: If Nirvana's "Teen Spirit" was the moment of epiphany for mass culture about alternative rock, and 14 years later we're looking at a completely right-wing society, that didn't really fulfill that promise. I do feel in hindsight that we did change the world—ultimately, maybe we changed more the other parts of the world, and America just kind of absorbed us into their dumb story.

O: Now that you've had time to look back on Smashing Pumpkins and Zwan, do you see any recurring themes behind the breakups? Do you blame yourself at all?

BC: In the Pumpkins, when I reached that crossroads, I just covered it up. I think if you can see both situations evenly, I was dealing in both cases with extremely dysfunctional people, but the difference in the situations is that in the second case, I chose not to deal with it; in the first case, by choosing to deal with it, I created a whole other host of problems.

O: It sounds like you could see yourself going back with the Pumpkins.
BC: No, I think the relationships with James and D'arcy are pretty poor. I haven't spoken to D'arcy in over six years. And James, I don't think I've spoken to him in almost four. So I wouldn't be counting them in on the reunion tour anytime soon.

Question: Who was the junkie in Zwan that made Corgan pull the plug? Was it the Chavez dude?
Here's the link to the interview.
http://www.theonionavclub.com/?ref=onion2
 
i think most pumpkins fans will agree that there has ALWAYS been a negative "my favorite band is more hardcore than SP!" feeling from the general public. i remember having arguments in high school about how SP were sellouts, and bands like days of the new (lol!) and pavement and other shitty bands were a driving force and were respectable.

this is nothing new for pumpkins fans. but whether you guys love it or hate it that the pumpkins are coming back, the most important thing is that they DO come back and make the fans (all 5 of them lololllllllllllllllllll) happy.

again, even at the height of the bands "popularity", there were plenty of haters. oh well
 

Diablos

Member
FrenchMovieTheme said:
i think most pumpkins fans will agree that there has ALWAYS been a negative "my favorite band is more hardcore than SP!" feeling from the general public. i remember having arguments in high school about how SP were sellouts, and bands like days of the new (lol!) and pavement and other shitty bands were a driving force and were respectable.

this is nothing new for pumpkins fans. but whether you guys love it or hate it that the pumpkins are coming back, the most important thing is that they DO come back and make the fans (all 5 of them lololllllllllllllllllll) happy.

again, even at the height of the bands "popularity", there were plenty of haters. oh well
Lots of people hate the Pumpkins not because of the music, so much as it is Corgan's voice (understandable) or they're really upset, for some reason, that the Pumpkins had so much more depth to their discography. My one friend is always like, turned off by the fact that Corgan and Chamberlin are so talented. He hates it. It's like jealousy. And then he goes back listening to shitty bands like Yellowcard.
 
Lots of people hate the Pumpkins not because of the music, so much as it is Corgan's voice (understandable) or they're really upset, for some reason, that the Pumpkins had so much more depth to their discography. My one friend is always like, turned off by the fact that Corgan and Chamberlin are so talented. He hates it. It's like jealousy. And then he goes back listening to shitty bands like Yellowcard.

:lol

very true.
 

Diablos

Member
I just don't get it, even excluding the Pumpkins there are so many bands out there that turn people off (Radiohead, The Arcade Fire, Death Cab, Muse, Modest Mouse, I could go on forever) for having so much depth to their music but they just don't wanna hear and would rather go back to listening to the same old boring shit.

Death Cab for Cutie, for example. They're the only "emo" band that GETS IT RIGHT. But no, the kids would rather listen to Dashboard Confessional. Idiots. Chris Cacrappa is such a phony it makes me sick. He's in his 30's and writes songs that remind me of 14 year olds that can't find a date to the dance. Get the fuck outta here.
 

White Man

Member
Diablos said:
Death Cab for Cutie, for example. They're the only "emo" band that GETS IT RIGHT. But no, the kids would rather listen to Dashboard Confessional. Idiots. Chris Cacrappa is such a phony it makes me sick. He's in his 30's and writes songs that remind me of 14 year olds that can't find a date to the dance. Get the fuck outta here.

Wait a year. Death Cab just signed. Their next album's gonna blow up.

Of course, Death Cab sucks total ass, and Gibbard's songwriting is at least equally as cringe inducing as Dashboard's. And his girlfriend is ugly.
 

Diablos

Member
White Man said:
Of course, Death Cab sucks total ass, and Gibbard's songwriting is at least equally as cringe inducing as Dashboard's. And his girlfriend is ugly.
Death Cab deserves the success. Even if they "sell out" a bit, they've done enough significant work when they were underground.

Do you like anything?
 

White Man

Member
Diablos said:
Do you like anything?

Of course I do. Death Cab's success is mind-boggling to me, though. It's the epitome of 'safe,' banal, inoffensive music.

And Ben Gibbard is chunky and he has an ugly girlfriend, too.
 

Diablos

Member
White Man said:
Of course I do. Death Cab's success is mind-boggling to me, though. It's the epitome of 'safe,' banal, inoffensive music. And Ben Gibbard is chunky and he has an ugly girlfriend, too.
Last time I checked, looking like a model was not required to write good music. 'safe', banal, inoffensive? Are you kidding? Death Cab is indie pop perfection.

Star Power: What examples do you have? I'm taking about bands I've actually heard people not liking for the specific reason of them "trying to do too much" or "not figuring out what they want to do."
 

White Man

Member
Diablos, listen to some Wolf Eyes. They rock. The texture is so good. It gives me a happy feeling. 37/40

EDIT:

He writes good music? Time to break out the lyrics!

I am thinking it's a sign that the freckles
In our eyes are mirror images and when
We kiss they're perfectly aligned

A grown man wrote that. A. grown. man.
 

Diablos

Member
Don't get me started on your boy Jamie Stewart (if he's manly enough to even be called a boy, I'm not sure.)

PS - I never said Death Cab was perfect, but they do have a lot of good songs. A lot aren't so good. But the good definitely outweigh the bad.
 

White Man

Member
Diablos said:
Don't get me started on your boy Jamie Stewart (if he's manly enough to even be called a boy, I'm not sure.)

PS - I never said Death Cab was perfect, but they do have a lot of good songs. A lot aren't so good. But the good definitely outweigh the bad.

Jamie Stewart's had a few clunkers (Walnut House), but when he hits, he hits (Hives, Hives).

The difference is that:
1) Jamie Stewart isn't being as ever-earnest as Gibbard.
2) His music sounds interesting.

Also note that my first impressions on La Foret are largely mixed. I'm holding off until the final release to give it a listen again.

PS - I can't name a single Death Cab song I like. The District Sleeps Alone Tonite is kind of good, though.
 

Diablos

Member
Pfft. Suit yourself. Debate Exposes Doubt, Your Bruise, President of What, Amputations, Wait, Why You'd Want to Live Here, so many good songs he has written.

As for Xiu Xiu,I've gotta admit, it was pretty ballsy of him to write something like "support our troops OH!"
But there are, quite literally, too many gay vibes on that album for me.
 

White Man

Member
Diablos said:
But there are, quite literally, too many gay vibes on that album for me.

I dunno, I think Walnut House alone makes A Promise the gayest of the Xiu Xiu albums. Not counting Fag Patrol, of course, which despite the title is not very gay.
 

White Man

Member
Diablos said:
He's a troll that you can feed, yes.

I didn't troll you once in this thread. That got boring.

Calling you out the comment

Death Cab for Cutie, for example. They're the only "emo" band that GETS IT RIGHT.

wasn't a troll. The only "emo" band that gets it right?
 

White Man

Member
Diablos said:
Shut up. :lol :lol

btw,

corgandunst1d3ui.jpg

Diablos == ignore list GET.

I think at this point you WANT to be trolled. People dislike Corgan because they're jealous of his talent? Death Cab for Cutie is the greatest emo/indie pop (make up your mind) band?

You need to learn how to handle it when somebody criticizes, fairly or unfairly, something you like. I hate to break it to you, but pop music is completely subjective. Just because I don't adore SP doesn't mean I'm
turned off by the fact that Corgan and Chamberlin are so talented.

If you insist on trotting out a SP/Corgan thread every other week, how about you take it to a forum where ever other post won't be by you?

Thank god you don't post at a normal music board where people rib each other's favorites all the time. You'd be crying all over your keyboard.
 
White Man said:
Of course I do. Death Cab's success is mind-boggling to me, though. It's the epitome of 'safe,' banal, inoffensive music.

And Ben Gibbard is chunky and he has an ugly girlfriend, too.

White Man and many others trash one of my favorite bands, and I don't let it get to me. Diablos, you'd do well to learn how to do the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom