Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

In Search of Nirvana: Why Nirvana: The True Story Could Never Be “True”

2015; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 38; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/03007766.2014.994326

1740-1712

Jeremy A Thackray,

Rhetoric and Communication Studies

AbstractIn my book Nirvana: The True Story (2006), I undertake an autoethnographical approach to biography, attempting to impart an understanding of my chosen subject—the rock band Nirvana—via discussion of my own experiences. On numerous occasions, I veer off into tangential asides, frequently using extensive footnotes to explain obscure musical references. Personal anecdotes are juxtaposed with "insider" information; at crucial points in the story (notable concerts, the first meeting of singer Kurt Cobain with his future wife Courtney Love, the news of Cobain's suicide), the linear thread of the narrative spills over into a multi-faceted approach, with several different (and sometimes opposing) voices given equal prominence. Despite my firsthand experience of the band, however, Nirvana: The True Story is not considered authoritative, even within its own field. This article considers the reasons why this may be the case. Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.Notes [1] Nick Kent is a notorious NME (New Musical Express) writer of the late '70s, known for his hard-living and association with "punk rock." Marcia, the NME's receptionist of the time, used to tell a story of how Kent would show up to the music paper's offices with his cock hanging out of his trousers—a story later verified by UK entertainer CitationDanny Baker in his autobiography Going to Sea in a Sieve. [2] The popular conception of Nirvana is that of a band from Seattle, because its first record company, Sub Pop Records—the iconoclastic record company credited with inventing grunge, the musical movement with which Nirvana became associated—was based in the city. However, some rock historians have argued that Seattle's neighboring city Olympia, WA, has more of a claim on the band. It was the place to which the band's singer Kurt Cobain chose to move once he left his birthplace of Aberdeen, WA. He lived there throughout the writing and recording of the band's pivotal first two albums, Bleach and Nevermind. It was only after Nevermind reached Number One on Billboard in December 1991 that he moved to Seattle; even then, he lived there only for a total period of less than two years, also living in Los Angeles for a time. [3] In 1992, Entertainment Weekly called me "the man who invented grunge." [4] A surprisingly difficult fact to prove. There are several varying accounts as to when the couple met: many contain similar elements (for example, the couple wrestled on the floor) but differ in location and year. My claim is backed up by anecdotal observation at the time—the couple often referred to the fact that I was "in [Kurt Cobain's] will" because I'd introduced them, a joke that later got reprinted as possible fact in the UK music magazine Select following Cobain's death. In 1993, following a notorious Vanity Fair article, in which a heavily pregnant Courtney Love was pictured smoking a cigarette, the couple agreed to a series of three joint interviews (including one with me at Melody Maker) as an exercise in damage limitation. During the third of them, published in New York-based teen girl magazine Sassy, the married couple make reference to the concert where they met (i.e. when I introduced them). The reason for the disparity was because they did not want Courtney to be seen as a "gold digger," becoming pregnant so soon after they met, so they invented an earlier meeting. [5] When Nirvana: The True Story was published in the United States in 2007, it was re-titled Nirvana: The Biography to avoid confusing American readers who, it was felt, might not appreciate the play on words in the title of the UK edition. (The True Story was originally chosen to reflect both the fallacious disclaimer many films and books utilize—"based upon a true story"—and my pen name.) As the American edition of the book is the best-known of the 13 or so editions to date—the book has been translated into several different languages, including Japanese, Russian, Polish, and German—it is this edition that will be referenced in this essay. [6] In a 1995 paper, academic Steve Jones quotes extensively from the music paper of which I was then assistant editor—Melody Maker—but fails to reference my work. A surprising oversight, bearing in mind my position as "the man who invented grunge" and well-known confidant of the band. Other academic papers from the '90s follow Jones's example. For example, both Bell and Shevory fail to cite my writing, even though the former's paper is entitled Citation"Why Seattle? An Examination of an Alternative Rock Culture Hearth," and there is a plaque set in the wall of the Sub Pop Records building in Seattle that credits me with "breaking" grunge (and, by extension, Seattle) to the outside world. [7] I have never sought to have this belief verified—it is an impression based on anecdotal evidence given to me by musicians and record company people in Seattle who were around during the late '80s/early '90s, when Nirvana were in the ascendancy, and when Cross was a local music journalist and publisher of local music magazine The Rocket. The "insiders" felt that Cross looked abroad for content for his publication, featuring grunge only grudgingly after it became well-known in the UK and elsewhere. Of course, these being local music industry people, they would have had a skewed perspective that would naturally have downplayed Cross's interest in the Seattle "scene." Perhaps I am wrong about Cross's "commitment" to Nirvana. The general tone of Heavier Than Heaven makes me think not, though. Of course, whether being a fan of the band affects a writer's ability to produce a good biography of the band in question is another argument altogether. [8]CitationNietzsche argues that strong cultures will create these stories about themselves, whereas the mark of a declining civilization is when it starts to stand outside its own perspective, historicizes its own viewpoint, become relativistic. Nietzsche talks about a will to stupidity, or will to ignorance, behind every truth—and he thinks that is a good thing, better than a sort of enfeebled ironic detachment (9–26). [9] Coming from someone who did not even know Cobain, you might consider this quite some conceit—for Cross to make these assumptions about a stranger's motivations—but no one has seemed unduly worried by the chapter. This, as CitationMarcus argues in Auto/biographical Discourses, is how biographers behave. They create their own myths.[10] I can recall a few specific incidents—in the couple's home in Los Angeles and on tour in Oslo—where Courtney Love (as my particular friend) suggested to Kurt that I read some of his journals. Both suggestions received short shrift. Kurt emphasized he did not want his private thoughts read by the public.[11] It's also easy to write people important to the story out of it by excluding information. All three Nirvana biographies under discussion here are guilty of doing that.[12] The original press release for my 2004 book CitationThe White Stripes and the Sound of Mutant Blues referred to Jack and Meg White as "siblings."[13] As part of my preparation for this article, I asked the following question on Facebook: "Why is my Nirvana biography not considered as authoritative as some of the other Nirvana books?" The responses I received surprised me, although perhaps they should not have, considering the skewed perspective of any circle of people who choose to follow even a minor public figure on a social media network. Most felt that my book is considered an authority. These two comments from Facebook "friends" were typical: "I didn't know this and [I] think it's bullshit. You were actually friends with Kurt and knew him as a person so I would think yours would be more believable than most that are out there" (True, Gaar, and Footman); "I would have thought the first-hand element would have made it more credible. The usual whine about rock bios (on message boards, Amazon, at least) is 'why should I care what some critic says about Kurt/Elvis/Justin? I only care what the star himself thinks.' As if the star's analysis of his/her own life and/or work is by definition more valid than anyone else's" (True, Gaar, and Footman). Others suggested that it was because the book was published after the other two, and it has never been as widely available. Gaar—author of several Nirvana books herself (she also served as a project consultant on the Nirvana box-set, 2004's With the Lights Out)—wanted to know how I had formed the impression. It's a fair question. I have attempted to address it in this article.Additional informationNotes on contributorsJeremy ThackrayJeremy Thackray is presently a lecturer and PhD student at QUT in Brisbane, studying the effects of web 2.0 environments on music criticism. As Everett True, he has written several books, notably Nirvana: The True Story, and has been credited with inventing "grunge." He is the former editor of UK music publications Melody Maker, VOX, Careless Talk Costs Lives, and Plan B Magazine, and regularly performs on stage as the Legend!.