So the new Gaslight record is blowing up, and I'm a huge fanboy. They signed my CD and remembered me from the Cambridge show. Sweet
Anyway, I just want to throw this idea out there, and let people comment if they wish. Someone in an itunes review of the '59 Sound said that Gaslight is definitely not the next Clash, but are definitely the next Replacements.
I ask this: Who's to say that the Clash are better than the Replacements? I don't believe that. I'll take ANY replacements record over the best Clash records, and I'll take Gaslight over them both. But why do we hold these bands up so high? Why is it so offensive to call a band the new Clash? Isn't that what punk rock was against? Thoughts?
3 comments:
The Clash were one of the first bands from the '77 era so that made them kind of revolutionary. They were different so people remembered them and London Calling is universally accepted as one of the top 5 best rock albums ever made. The Replacements are in the top...10 best rock records ever. The Clash were pretty radical, musically. they changed all the time. i like the 'mats more too but they're a traditional rock band. The Clash stand out more.
I get all that, but none of what you mentioned is a tangible FACT about the band, and this is the kind of thinking that I think needs to be examined. Does London Calling really beat the stuffing out of every punk album ever? I say no.
alex (the bassist) is all about the clash; somehow they came up in convo and he made it clear. My conclusion, if he had his choice he'd go with being the next clash ...but that was just the impression I got...
I'm aware that my comment has no facts about the band and it has no use whatsoever to the reader; unless the reader is a die hard gaslight and clash fan...
Post a Comment