One of the harsh realities for music fans is accepting that your favorite musicians are going to eventually get older. That what they start out as won’t necessarily be what they end as. To a degree, we all know this when getting into a newer band. Even if the thought is pushed to the back of our minds, it’s an idea that slowly gnaws at you as the years go by.
There is no better band to start with than Weezer. Everyone knows the story. In fact, it’s one the band will never be able to escape. Namely, that their first two albums were masterpieces, and everything after that ranged from just okay to awful. Detractors will say that the music is just simply not the same anymore. But perhaps it’s not that the music isn’t the same as it used to be, but rather that they refused to grow up. Lyrically, Rivers Cuomo is still singing about the same topics he always has – heartbreak and loneliness. He’s still pumping out the geeky anthems. Musically, they haven’t strayed that far from the path (except maybe for last year’s “Can’t Stop Partying” and the glossy production of 2005’s Make Believe). All the components of original Weezer are still there. Perhaps the real issue is that at the age of 40, these themes don’t really resonate or come across as being genuine anymore. After all, who wants to hear your dad singing to you about angst and partying in clubs with girls? Rivers’ tongue in cheek humor is still here, but maybe fans have just grown out of it. And on some levels, there is only so many times you can use the same tried-and-true pop formula before it starts getting nauseating. At the same time, no one can really expect Rivers to put out another album like Pinkerton, because he will never be that angst-filled teen again. The guy is happily married and has a kid. Which makes me wonder, what would have happened had Weezer broken up after Pinkerton? Would they be seen as these pioneers in the same way Pavement was? Would their legacy have been far better off?
An interesting phenomenon in music is that bands that break up before they get a chance to fizzle out are often looked at as legendary. There is something that draws us into the fact that these bands put out incredible material and then their lifespan was cut short (either by death, or simply the band breaking up). Maybe it’s the mystery of never knowing the answer to the “what if.” Or maybe it’s just the fact that you already know what you are going to get when a band is finished. Everything they have ever done is laid out on the table for you. There is no – what will the next album be? No worry of them having a misstep or getting worse as they get older. There are obvious choices to demonstrate this (Nirvana) but instead I will go with The Beatles. Considered one of the most influential bands of all time (and to many the best band ever to exist), The Beatles’ run only lasted ten years. And what a ten years it was. Some of the best music to ever be created. But consider that they never really had a chance to get older, to have missteps. Imagine The Beatles never had broken up, and were playing Basketball Arenas and doing specials on VH1. You have to really wonder what kind of music they would have put out. Had they actually made it into the ’70s, maybe we would have made a disco album. After all, music is influenced by what is going on at the times (yes even The Rolling Stones had some disco influenced tunes). But the fact remains, The Beatles had an incredible 10 year run, and broke up at their peak. They never had the chance to burn out.
Is there a sort of wisdom to just accepting that artists will get older, and being able to find enjoyment out of the music, even if it’s nowhere as good as their earlier stuff? After all, there is still something about their sound that you always loved, and it’s still present even if it’s not as strong as is used to be. The signature sound is still there. But being able to accept that they are not the same people that they were when they made an album when they were twenty. That like us, they changed over time. Not only on a personal level, but even on a musical level (what influences them). More often than not, I see people that will simply just not listen to a band if their music later in their career is not as good as it was when they were in their prime. That’s a valid stance, but at the same time there is a sense of awe to be had when you listen to your favorite artist and realize they are not immortal. That just like you they have to get older eventually and it can be a fascinating process. Maybe some fear this, and this is why they only listen to bands in their prime. Or maybe I’m thinking too deeply into it and they simply just like to only listen to a band when they are youthful and “good.” But it’s an interesting thought in that, we can’t stop ourselves from aging, but we can always keep our music young by choosing what to listen to and skip the aging process.
