Who is the defining artist of this generation?

[UZI Suicide 0]

In the past we've had Elvis Presley, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Michael Jackson, Led Zeppelin, Guns N' Roses, Nirvana, and probably a few I'm forgetting. Artists and bands who were just as popular with mainstream music fans who got all their music from top 40 radio as they were with the casual music fan, or the die-hard music fan who despises all the pop that fills radio and television.

 

Obviously, while not EVERYONE liked these artists, they were generally loved by most music fans and were "THE" band of their time. They're still idolized today and made music that will be probably be played forever.

 

But, is there anyone like that today? There doesn't seem to be any one band or artist that this generation of teenagers has latched onto like they did in the 80's when GnR came on the scene and blew the lid off of rock, or when Nirvana arrived a few years later and did the very same thing.

 

One band I thought of was U2, as they're probably the biggest band in the world right now, although I don't really think they speak to this generation's young people. They're a popular band that spans a lot of time, but at the end of the day they'll probably be more associated with their earlier stuff.

 

I posed this question to a bdudy of mine and he named me two bands - Green Day and Red Hot Chilli Peppers.

 

Green Day mostly because of "American Idiot". It is seen by many as them "selling out", but regardless, it's an album that 10-20 years from now when Rolling Stone and Spin Magazine are talking about the top records of this decade, American Idiot will likely be at the top, and most of the young people of today would probably agree. Plus, along with American Idiot, they've got two other albums that the majority of music fans would probably consider "classics" with Dookie and Nimrod.

 

His reasoning for RHCP was that they have a fanbase that ranges from pre-teen girls to middle-aged people. They sell millions of records and are all over MTV, but still appeal to music fans who never listen to the top 40 pop stations. They've got two albums that are generally considered to be classics with BSSM and Californication, and possibly a third now with Stadium Arcadium.

 

 

I don't agree with the Green Day assessment, although I can somewhat see the basis for the RHCP argument, but while I think they'll be a band that remains popular long after they're done playing, I don't ever see them reaching the status of the bands I listed.

 

Who would you nominate? Are there even any bands that can be considered for this right now?

[Hawk 34 0]

If we are talking purely as in the sense the artist was the "it" of that generation, you probably have to point towards Eminem for that one.

 

Long-term standing is imposssible to measure because we can't forsee the future. I don't think RHCP are really anywhere near the Elvis/Beatles/Zepplin/Nirvana status.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I don't like them, but I think Pearl Jam might be up there.

[naiwf 0]

Green Day is INSANELY overrated, and I say that as someone who owns their first three albums. I'd agree with the guy who said Eminem is probably the defining artist of the last 5-10 years for all of the same reasons that Elvis, the Beatles, Nirvana etc were.

[UZI Suicide 0]

Eminem is a good one, forgot to mention him.

[Brett Favre 0]

Eminem. Like Elvis was for his generation.

[snuffbox 0]

Kanye West.

[Perfxion 0]

For Rap: Eminem and Jay Z

 

For Pop: Mariah Carey, she sells like she was Elvis or the Beetles.

[Hawk 34 0]

Kanye West.

 

What has Kanye done to define this generation? Having a couple successful albums hardly qualifies as defining artist of a generation. You need to have cultural impact, critical success, long term status to cement your place alongside Elvis, Beatles, Jackson and Nirvana. Kanye has accomplished critical success but hasn't reached the other two spots.

 

To define your generation for music, it needs to go beyond just album sales. Would you look at post-"rap war"/grunge and consider Mariah Carey the defining performer of that generation? Creed, sold a shit-load of albums but that doesn't mean they are defining artists.

[BUTT 0]

Critical success doesn't mean shit.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

I'm actually going to be a little queer here and say that Slipknot will be one of the defining bands of this generation. Why, you ask? Well, not only do they have a huge fanbase, but just about everybody knows who they are at the very least. They're the modern-day KISS: it's all about the show and little about the music itself, even if the bandmembers are decent musicians in their own right.

 

Oh...and fucking Pantera, but that's a given to any fan of heavy music.

[Guest Felonies!]

Radiohead defined its generation pretty well. OK Computer does a good job of capturing the zeitgeist of the 90s, but even that, their highest-selling album, is "only" around 8 million, which ain't shit next to Dark Side or Thriller.

 

I don't think it's Green Day. Green Day pretty much did their thing in the mid to late 90s, fell off the radar, then visually co-opted the younger bands, who were in turn just visually co-opting Joy Division and The Cure, and made their shitty Bush-bashing album, which got critical acclaim because nobody likes George Bush.

 

Rap and country are ancillary industries here. Multimillion dollar industries, of course, but ancillary nonetheless. Eminem, Dr. Dre, Jay-Z, Tupac, Garth Brooks, Faith Hill, Tim McGraw, Kenny Chesney, and so forth all sell shitloads of albums and are very important to lots of people, but the bands we've cited thus far have been rock: Elvis, Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin, Floyd, U2, GnR, Nirvana. Eminem doesn't fit on that list.

 

It's not Coldplay, obviously.

 

RHCP is a great band, and they probably have three classics, but I think they've just kinda been very very near the top. Maybe it's because of they've had too much of a revolving-door lineup. The Rolling Stones had some shuffling, but it's still been Jagger/Richards/Watts the whole time, the long, long, long time.

[Carnival 0]

Eminem fits on top of that list, player.

[EricMM 0]

Everyone looking for the next Bob Dylan.

 

It's not Em. It just isn't.

 

I don't think we'll get one.

[Annabelle 0]

NOBODY.

 

we're living in horrible times. the last legendary artist we can look back to is cobain. deal with it.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

Radiohead. And you guys know I'm not a fanboy. However, their next album needs to be a little more substantial than HTTT if they want to continue to be this generation's Pink Floyd (not that I'm saying that that's their goal, but you know).

[C Dubya 04 0]

I thought that Beck was going to be, but I think that as good as his albums have been, to be a defining artist you do need more commercial success.

[Carnival 0]

cobain is legendary because he killed himself.

 

if eddie vedder blew his brains out after "vs", people would have the same opinion of him, as they do of cobain now.

[C Dubya 04 0]

Eh, while I agree to a point, Nevermind was the album that got everything going in the mainstream and Cobain was always a lot more of an attention grabber than was Vedder.

[cbacon 0]

NOBODY.

 

we're living in horrible times. the last legendary artist we can look back to is cobain. deal with it.

 

'quotin dis.

 

Eminem is laughable. He was a flash in the pan artist that won't be remembered in 10 years.

[snuffbox 0]

Riiight.

[Brett Favre 0]

Eminem a flash in the pan? That's laughable.

[Brett Favre 0]

And people need to know this artist/band. Radiohead is not ultra popular like the others mentioned. This means that when you go to a rap, R&B, country, techno, pop, rock, jazz fan, they'll know about Radiohead. That's not the case. With Eminem, it is.

[cbacon 0]

Eminem a flash in the pan? That's laughable.

 

If we're talking relative to a generation, then yeah, he was.

[Brett Favre 0]

Considering Nirvana was around for like 6 years, and is considered as one of these defining artists in a generation, what Eminem has done is not a flash in the pan.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Eminem a flash in the pan? That's laughable.

 

If we're talking relative to a generation, then yeah, he was.

 

What are you talking about? He's had a good 7 years or so as the dominant figure in popular music (that's more than the Beatles' original run or MJ's hot period). He has had 3 pantheon-level albums, critical recognition and mainstream success and notoriety. That's far more than a flash in the pan. The argument for Eminemn is as good as any.

[Man Who Sold The World 0]

Might get heat for this, but honestly give Kanye West a few years and he might define this generation. I mean, he's not by any means a rapper (or a good one at that), his beats are just copies off other peoples hits, but hear me out:

 

I mean, you think without his production on Beanie Sigels and Common's albums they'd be hits? Those guys have been out for YEARS and didn't see good album charts until West did production on them. What about Lupe Fiasco and Rhymefest? I don't think we'd be seeing them on our TV screens with top singles if Kanye wasn't around. He's producing a new generation and it's revolving right before us. I mean, you may hate the guy, but he's helped some good people get off their feet.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

What about Outkast? They've had a good 10 years or so in the mainstream. Every album has been successful and well-reviewed.

[Brett Favre 0]

Outkast is not a bad choice at all.

[LJSexay 0]

Im gonna vouch fo Eminem, and tell people to get used to the idea. Rock took a huge backseat to Hip-hop and Rap in this past generation. To have Eminem be the epitome of that makes total sense.