Drowned in Sound

Search



my chemical romance cropped a bit

New Emo Goth Danger? My Chemical Romance confront tabloid criticism

no votes
?
by Mike Diver

Today should, really, be a day off for New Jersey quintet My Chemical Romance: the night before they played Hammersmith Palais, tomorrow they’ll play second-fiddle to Muse’s ambitious prog-rock in Edinburgh before then entertaining muddied attendees at the Reading and Leeds festivals. But there’s no rest to be had: a new album’s on the horizon, and there’s press to attend to. For an entire day.

Gerard Way – the band’s vocalist, whose glossy black locks have now been shorn, almost military style, and bleached white-blonde – yawns after only five minutes in DiS’s company. He apologies immediately, explaining that the band’s promotional work began at 10.15 in the morning. It’s now gone eight-thirty in the evening. His bandmates sit around him in a west London hotel room: Gerard’s brother, bassist Mikey Way, remains silent throughout, and drummer Bob Bryar curls up on a sofa, visually shattered. Only guitarists Frank Iero and Ray Toro can muster enough energy to occasionally contribute to the band’s final interview of the day, one that arrives on the back of an afternoon spent talking to the German rock press.

“It’s the record of our dreams,” says Gerard of My Chemical Romance’s third album, The Black Parade, due for release in October. The title’s been a badly-kept secret for weeks. “It’s a record that you want to sit down with – you want to listen to the entire thing. Conceptually, I believe, we’ve finally hit what we wanted – even with what we got to say with the record, it’s what we wanted to say.”

Something that the band repeatedly stresses during DiS’s allocated time is their desire to bring theatrics back into rock music. It’s something they dabble with on stage at the Hammersmith show – an announcement is made prior to their performance, saying that MCR will not play; instead, they’ll be replaced by The Black Parade. The kids in the crowd, of course, knew what was up.

---
"There’s a pageantry to rock that’s been missing,
and that’s the ambition on the new record."
---

“We did it with full knowledge that when the announcement was being made, the kids would kind of know what the deal was,” says Gerard. “There was a little bit of theatre to it, yeah. You listen to this new record, and there’s that kind of ambition on it – it’s the ambition of hopefully bringing rock to that place where it’s majestic again, where it’s theatrical again. There’s a pageantry to rock that’s been missing, and that’s the ambition on the new record.”

DiS gets to hear half-a-dozen or so songs from The Black Parade prior to our rendezvous with the group. Where it does improve upon its predecessor, 2004’s breakthrough release Three Cheers For Sweet Revenge, is in its coherency and flow – songs fade in and out of each other, with a specific narrative running the record’s length. You’d call it a concept record, progressive even, but that’d be potentially misleading: it still sounds like a massively commercial rock record, one that owes more to Queen than any contemporary emo act.

“I don’t think it’s ever a conscious decision to write mainstream songs,” says Gerard. “In fact, I think some of the structure is the opposite of mainstream structure, but the idea was to directly affect people in a larger way, in a more direct way. That was the objective with this record – we wanted to cross over to, like, many people, so that this affects lives, lots of lives.

“There are strings and horns and a marching band on the new album,” continues the singer. “We got a big toy box, and got to do what we want. We got everything in our arsenal that we wanted, but luckily we’ve a sense about ourselves that stops us being self-indulgent, so we used just enough – well, that’s what I feel. We went a little over the top, but never to the point of boring people, I think.”

The proof, of course, will be in the proverbial pudding. For the first time in their history, My Chemical Romance will release a single prior to its parent album: ‘Welcome to the Black Parade’ is the taster in question, and its video led to an incident that was widely misreported across the music press.

Gerard laughs, rocking his head back onto the sofa – we’ve not even said ‘burns’ or ‘car crash’ yet (click to see how DiS got it wrong, too). “The internet can actually work against you,” says the singer – My Chemical Romance were one of the first bands to really benefit from internet coverage prior to their signing with a label, major or otherwise. “The minute you don’t want to talk fully about something – say you have to cancel a show – then all of a sudden the internet answers it for you.

---
“We get a lot of young kids at our shows,
and when there’s a rush, little kids will fall."
---

“The reason we didn’t want to talk about it was because we were filming a video,” he continues, “which goes back to that secrecy thing. So all we could say was, ‘Hey, we’re hurt’. And then suddenly we’re in a car accident? We were just filming two videos, back to back, and the second was really intense and involved lots of fire, and a couple of guys got hurt. We tried, against doctor’s orders, to rehearse for our Street Scene show in San Diego, but the hospital said, ‘You shouldn’t be walking, the two of you’. So we wrapped that up and went to Japan, and we were okay for the most part.”

The injured individuals – drummer Bryar (suffered burns to his legs) and Gerard himself (torn ankle ligaments) – seem well enough now, but the cancelling of their Street Scene Festival appearance meant that they missed witnessing a crush during Tool’s headline set. Some fifteen people were injured in the incident, which DiS reported here. “We get a lot of young kids at our shows, and when there’s a rush of kids, little kids will fall,” says Iero. “We’ve had that hardcore education, but these kids haven’t, and we try to tell them that once we know where it’s likely to happen to get out of there, as people are gonna fall into them and over them.”

Gerard’s suddenly giving the matter his absolute attention. “That’s a good point, as we’re very experienced in that kind of situation,” he says, leaning forward and out of his relaxed, lounging position. “We were schooled, basically, on Warped Tour, and we’re very observant about that stuff. We stop songs in a heartbeat – it doesn’t matter to us, as if we kill the momentum we know how to get back into stuff. We’re good at it now, actually. You have to work with the security, and the second you see a large hole open, that’s when the crushing will start, and you have to pay attention to that hole. If it doesn’t fill up with people again, as in people standing up, then we have to stop. So you have to be very conscious of that. A lot of bands don’t know what to do – they’re like, ‘Whatever, it happens, let’s keep playing’ – but you should stop. You need a really good security team, but the kids will also communicate with me, and you’re able to read mouths and see if people are panicking.”

The band’s young audience is a concern to know-nothing sorts who’ve been campaigning against the alleged persuasive nature of rock music for what feels like forever. Only recently, in August 2006, The Daily Mail ran an article warning parents of the ‘New Emo Goth Danger’ – those are exact words they used, and the piece can be read online here. One of only three bands mentioned in the piece – bands that apparently encourage behaviour such as self-harm – was My Chemical Romance. Gerard doesn’t know whether to laugh out loud or cry silently to himself.

---
"Papers like that will never do their homework, but it is kind of funny to call it ‘emo death cult’, or whatever it was called."
---

“The funny thing is that I’ve met more kids that have stopped self-harming because of us, than anything,” he says, his face masked with absolute seriousness. “That’s the case with most of the kids I meet, especially in the UK, so I guess it is some sort of epidemic. Most of the kids that I meet, that say thank you, are kids that used to self-harm. Kerrang! was involved, as one of their readers wrote in about it, and I ended up having a very personal discussion with this girl. I noticed she had all these cuts, and it really bummed me out, and I was hoping that she didn’t feel that she needed to do that in order to come to the show. And I ended up meeting the girl and her mother – the mother had written a letter to Kerrang! – and she said because of the band she’s now stopped doing that. Papers like that will never do their homework, but it is kind of funny to call it ‘emo death cult’, or whatever it was called. ‘New Emo Goth Danger’?”

Iero cackles: “Ha! I like that! That’s the title of the next album, New Emo Goth Danger!”

The matter raises a final point, though. My Chemical Romance are superstars nowadays, playing to thousands of kids – and we do mean kids – at each and every show they play. They must come in for a lot of stick from right-wingers who haven’t taken the time to realise that the band’s fantasy-horror lyrics are just that: fantasy. The music's immediate and the lyrics fun: there are no hidden messages calling for kids the world over to scratch their best friend's eyes out. Sure, the five-piece have posed for photo shoots covered in fake blood, playing-dead models lying at their feet, but that doesn’t make them a bad influence. They just like, as has already been mentioned, playing it up, theatrically.

“We live in a very sick bubble, made of concrete and bullet-proof casing,” says Gerard. “If you acknowledged all the ignorant stuff you heard, you’d never sleep, we’d never sleep. There’d be no time. I gotta say I’m not a fan of that Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back movie, but it has one of the best scenes I’ve ever seen. They literally go around to peoples’ houses that have talked shit about them on the internet and give it back to them. It’s the coolest thing in the world.”

Bloggers of the world beware: My Chemical Romance have your name, your number, and now they’ve quite probably got the money to order a hit. Or at least arrange for someone to unplug your broadband connection.


The Black Parade will be released via Warners/Reprise on October 23 (in the UK; October 24 in US)



the independent

did a quite amusing piece on 'goth is back, but now it's called emo' that was a riposte to the Mail's bullshit. i'd post a link but i'm going home now...


Huh?

I am so confused as to why DiS bothered to interview (using their best writer, at that) this "massively commercial" train wreck of a band. To me, this screams "sellout." Pitchfork are elitist assholes, and that attitude continues to chip away at the quality and credibility of their interviews, but man, it also means that they would never do anything like this. Good God...


um.

Why, really, should we not occasionally interview big bands?

We don't wish to reside in a self-perpetuated indie ghetto.

We like pop. We also like less-commercial acts. It's good, sometimes, to step out of our safety zone, if only to see what happens.

I fully expected a few comments like yours, but at the same time I hope people appreciate that we - I - didn't simply ask the band about their hair, or fashion, or their 'thing' with The Used, or any of that.


And also...

...you'll see that this piece shares front-page billing with a new-to-the-UK act, Cyann & Ben.

A Pitchfork-endorsed act, no less.


Right, right...

The issue is not whether or not you are interviewing "big" bands. The White Stripes are a big band. The Cure are a big band. So were Nirvana, Soundgarden, and the Beatles. But the difference is that those bands did/do create something that one might actually call art. My Chemical Romance are nothing more than a corporate product. They are no more relevant to rock music than the Spice Girls. They have nothing to say, their songs are cookie-cutter faux-punk bilge, and they are only in it for the money and to get laid. They represent everything in music that I always thought DiS was against.
You're twenty-six years old. You like Josh Pearson, My Bloody Valentine, Sleater-Kinney, and Part Chimp. You might fool some of the kids on this site, but you're not fooling me. I know you know better. Don't go down the road of Spin and Rolling Stone.


i think

you make quite a lot of assumptions of MCR that you are in no position to truly know.

i love DiS, and i love it for the fact that if you look through the reviews on the front page there's literally every genre represented - i like the fact Hatebreed, Beyonce and Kayo Dot share the same page.

the fact DiS can go and interview MCR - a band i really dislike - and see if they can find something within them people here might like, and at the same time put on Animal Collective at a gig can only be celebrated.


WHAT?

Are people not allowed to like/respect a good pop band, if they also like Sleater Kinney and My Bloody Valentine? My Chemical Romance are COMPLETELY relevant to rock music. They're not revolutionary, it's true. But their last album is a good pop-rock record. It wouldn't be on any list of even my 200 favourite records, but it's NOT a bad record. It has catchy tunes, anthemic choruses etc. GOOD SONGS. What's wrong with that? Faux-punk? In it for the money and to get laid? Oh PLEASE SHUT UP! 'Punk' means nothing. I'm sick of indie-snobbery-elitist bullshit. Stop it. To say that this band are 'a corporate product' is quite simply fucking rubbish. Had you heard of them before their last album was released? They got popular because they have catchy songs that a lot of people liked. They're not indie-bullshit-cool like most of the stuff that DiS reviews (OK, that's a personal opinion, I apologise.) They're a rock band. Just because it's easy to listen to (although this immediately makes them figures of hate amongst a lot of this site's readership) doesn't make it bad music. Some would argue to the contrary. My Chemical Romance are not clever people. They don't have an art-rock agenda, no matter what they say - they probably refer to each other in convesation as 'dude'. What's wrong with that? Most bands have nothing of worth to say. The Beatles sang about silly nonsense. Nirvana were miserable and not musically ground-breaking, and hyped-up far beyond My Chemical Romance will ever be. The White Stripes? I never got it. They're a two-piece band with minimal production. Well done. But i'll admit that they all are/were genuinely great bands in their own right, whether I like them or not. Anyone's definition of 'art' is hugely debatable, and to say that The Beatles were a more artful or credible than My Chemical Romance is a lazy, typical thing to say. This is a typical defensive arguement, granted. I don't care. People wouldn't hate this band if they hadn't got big. It's as simple as that. You may not like them, but that doesn't make them irrelevant.

I don't know what DiS is 'for', exactly. But it's become simply a place for indie wankers to slag off anything approaching 'mainstream'. I appreciate the fact that DiS writers will at least give time-of-day to anything approaching 'Music'. Sure, even they have, and express their opinions, but that's what being a critic is all about. And to imply that a band is effectively manufactured, just because they're popular with the black-hair/black-hoodie brigade, is ridiculous. Booooo to you, sir.


What is filling the pace between your ears? Wax?

To Panic, music websites are run by music critics. Music critics, like it or not, tell us what we should like based on their own allegedly refined taste. Music critics are not in the business of finding the best in everyone as you seem to suggest. That's for psychiatrists or your mom to do. It neither benefits them or us to do so. They tell us what is good so that we don't waste our money and so they don't end up looking like dumbasses...unless they have ulterior motives. No good music critic at DiS (like Mike Diver) actually likes My Chemical Romance.
To average_jon, there is nothing wrong with liking a good pop band, but My Chemical Romance simply are not worthy of that title. You say they are good, but then later you admit that they are not clever. If you are not even clever, how are you worthy of being the featured interview on any music website? The answer of course is that My Chemical Romance is not, and hence, my suspicion is legitimate.
I am surprised that this even needs to be stated on here, but for the record, there is virtually no correlation between a band's popularity with the general public and the quality of the songs they create. The general public happens to "like" a lot of MOR things that are shoved in their faces only because they are shoved in their faces, and quite frankly, they don't know any better. Generally speaking, the kind of people who frequent this site are the kind of people who really LISTEN to music (and don't always use it as background noise while they munch their cereal), are smart enough to LOOK for music that is better than what is crammed down their throats by record companies, and do know better. So yes, making My Chemical Romance a feature interview does insult the intelligence of most people who come to this site.
You wasted a ton of space seemingly trying to refute the greatness of the big bands I mentioned...but then admitted they were great. If the Beatles are great as you say, and My Chemical Romance are not even clever, then what I had to say was not "lazy" but TRUE. Thank you for talking in circles and ultimately supporting what I had to say. My Chemical Romance deserve to be hated and ignored not because they are popular but because it is obvious that they suck, even to you apparently.
Perhaps the only thing of interest that you had to say was that most bands have nothing of value to say. This was very enlightening, as it revealed why you would be the type of person to be unaware/unconcerned about the potential watering-down of the content on this site. You neither understand, care about, nor have any real knowledge of rock music. You hear, but you are not a LISTENER. A LISTENER knows that the best rock music has plenty of really important things to say about life, love, death, politics, society, and the human spirit. It saddens me to know that someone who frequents this site would more or less dismiss rock music as something frivolous in nature. It is depressing to me that someone who frequents any music site would even attempt to dismiss the Beatles as "silly." Christ.
DiS has always been about weeding out the bullshit that is pushed on consumers and being discerning about what music constitutes art in the world of rock 'n' roll. I write what I write not because I am an "elitist" but because I care so much about music. I believe in its power, and I want to see this site always approach it with the purest of intentions. I only hope this feature is not a harbinger of things to come.


Yeah yeah...

should say "space"!


you care so much about music

that you choose to waste your time complaining about it?

being a connoisseur of music (since you reject the word 'elitist') does not mean the automatic rejection of anything 'commercial'. That would be like a self-proclaimed 'connoisseur' of wine only ever going for the most expensive stuff available: unnecessary, lazy and, as your ridiculous self-aggrandizement shows, more of a pose than a true reflection of where enjoyment or satisfaction is found.


mhann24

do you often sit at home and intone such dirgeful monologues? If so please go back to wherever you come from and get back to work. What you have written is dull, unoriginal and pointless. You are a class A ringpiece.


An "ex" cynic?

You sound a lot like Republicans who tell protesters that by being critical of the government they are committing treason. When you care about something (as I care about DiS), you want to preserve it or Hell, even see it become better than it is. I sometimes complain about certain aspects of the music world on this site (as do you), and now I am complaining about one aspect of DiS. Do you follow?
If there is a band with a mainstream audience and they are good, I have no problem going out and buying their album. I think it is no coincidence though that those bands all bear one distinction. The mainstream came to them, not the other way around (if you are in something for the right reasons, you will do a better job). I really don't care what label a band is on, but I do think that major labels churn out a lot more stuff that strikes me as utter crap than smaller labels do. So what I just said applies to labels as well as bands. For smaller labels, the motive is rarely to just make money, cause frankly, they don't stand a chance against the big boys. They are obviously in the music business, at least in part, because they love music and they want to expose other people to something they feel is worthwhile. Hence, the bands they sign will be better because they were probably signed for the right reasons. That is probably why, a lot of the time, I end up gravitating toward bands that are not on major labels. It is not a "pose" as you suggest, and I hardly see how looking elsewhere for something good is lazy and unnecessary if you do not like what's being shoved in your face.


YOU

don't get to decide what constitutes 'good'


yes

i want a list of what is allowed to be featured on DiS

if only so that he never utters another word. ever.


Seriously?

So let's review. So far the only one with a semi-worthwhile response has been ex_cynic. Runners-up include a 14-year-old girl with an embarrassing My Space page, Raz (the guy whose musical taste is made fun of more frequently than almost anyone on this site), and someone else who apparently loves Ted Nugent and Westlife.
For the record, I don't ask that DiS always cover "good" artists-just ones that aren't laughably bad and obvious corporate tools. You know, the way they usually do. Oh, and writers should actually harbor a sliver of respect for the bands they cover. That's all I ask.


whatever


Being good = being clever?

"o average_jon, there is nothing wrong with liking a good pop band, but My Chemical Romance simply are not worthy of that title. You say they are good, but then later you admit that they are not clever. If you are not even clever, how are you worthy of being the featured interview on any music website?"

So, nowadays it's a necessity that you be clever in order to make music or get featured on a website?
That's news to me, I thought you just had to make good music/music that appeals to people.
Then again, I tend to judge what I like on what it sounds like, rather than how commercial the band may be or what their motives are.


Hmm

"I am surprised that this even needs to be stated on here, but for the record, there is virtually no correlation between a band's popularity with the general public and the quality of the songs they create. The general public happens to "like" a lot of MOR things that are shoved in their faces only because they are shoved in their faces, and quite frankly, they don't know any better. Generally speaking, the kind of people who frequent this site are the kind of people who really LISTEN to music (and don't always use it as background noise while they munch their cereal), are smart enough to LOOK for music that is better than what is crammed down their throats by record companies, and do know better."

Even if alot of the rest of the stuff he said was questionable, that bit, at least, is completely true..


That Daily Mail arcticle

refers to Green Day as emo. Of all the things they are, emo is not one of them.
I'd hesitate to call MCR emo as well, for that matter.


mhann24

It's so ridiculous when someone feels so strongly about an opinion that they have to think that the music they like is what everyone should be listening to. For example, my friend listens to the click five, Hilary duff, Rihanna etc. and she can't stand the fact that I don't listen to stuff like that because in her opinion music in that genre is what everyone should listen to. So, basically by saying My Chemical Romance sucks you're just stating an opinion that a My Chem fan will not consider and suddenly listen the record and completely hate it, so what's the point of writing that you hate this band when no one's going to care?
If you hate them so much then what was the point in reading this article and wasting your time? Read an article about a band that you like so you don't have to deal with people like me who are only going to dislike you. Is that what you want out of this? To be disliked? Whether it's to be disliked or just trying to write something that will change a fan of what they think of the band...well then you're succeeding in the dislike part of it because no 'real' fan is going to care about your opinion on a band that I feel in my opinion shouldn't be hated by people like you.
And another thing, do some research when you say the band is only writing the music to get laid and get money. For one basically all of the members of the band have girlfriends or they're getting married so I can't see how they would be sleeping with the fans. And two no one knew who My Chem was until their second album was made. In one week alone their second album sold more copies then the whole life time of the first record. Basically just keep your opinions about what bands you hate to your self because I'm sure there are bands that you like that that I hate but you won't see me writing nasty crap about them that in your opinion isn't true.


No more MCR fan responses please

Ha. What I had to say was not directed at people who like My Chemical Romance (or anyone who likes music that sounds like that). It was directed at everyone else (like Mike Diver), and those people make up the majority of visitors to this site. I read the article because I was curious, and I wanted to see how the interview was handled. Sure I pass judgment pretty quickly, but I would not criticize a writer on DiS without actually reading the article in question first.
In closing, my intent was not to get people to dislike me, although I would probably stop and reevaluate my life if I met someone like you in real life and that person did not dislike me. You have a lot to learn. By the way, I do not have to deal with people like you, but sometimes I choose to. Now I choose not to.


very odd...

I do come to DiS for the bands that aren't all over the radio and major music mags; so this interview does seem a little incongruous.

That said, i don't really feel the urge to tell Mike whom he can and cannot interview. Also, if i don't like a band i would tend to leave them to people who do; rather than wasting my time getting angry about it and venting all over the internet.

Ultimately i don't think you've got anything to worry about. If DiS chased the market catered for by other big publications and websites it's audience would wither and the site would become irrelevant; so i doubt that it'll become DrownInSmashHits any time soon.


mhann24

I've got a lot to learn? You're the one who read an article on a band that you hate because you were 'curious' and then you start complaining about how much they suck...i'd call that immature.
Little twelve year old kids complain about stuff like that and I'm sure you're not twelve.
It's fine that you're curious but when you start dising them it's not okay and you need to grow up, stop wasting your time and let the people who actually like them discuss this interview because maybe you're not aware but the whole world does not revolve around you. The music that you like and dislike is your buisness and your buisness alone so don't act like your opinion is going to change anyone's outlook on what they like.


mhann24

you are a fookin tool. The end. If you reply you're even more of a wiener.
(bet he does)


to the above post

who are you talking about?


er

'mhann24'. Or the indie warrior as his underpants attest.


he likes nirvana

and the sex pistols.who were the corporate punk band personified. nice one mate.


Please

As far as I am concerned, Nirvana are a great example for bands on major labels. Nirvana obviously had commercial appeal because Cobain happened to write great Beatlesque melodies. No shame in that. The mainstream came to Nirvana, and they stayed true to who they were pre-fame. They signed to a major label because the label they were on, Sub Pop, was doing a poor job of distributing their records. They were big fans of Sonic Youth who were already signed to Geffen. Sonic Youth had a devoted cult following and were allowed complete artistic freedom, so signing to DGC seemed like the right thing at the time. They weren't craving or anticipating fame and fortune, but those things came to them. They didn't follow a trend-they inadvertently started one. They were in it for the music, and they regularly voiced their intense distaste for members of their audience who never "got" the band's liberal stance. They also used their fame as a platform to promote the bands they loved. They took these bands on tour with them and used their leverage as a lucrative band to coerce their label into giving some of these bands contracts. I have nothing but respect for them.
As for the Pistols, Malcolm McClaren may have had the intuition to know that Steve Jones, Paul Cook, Glen Matlock, and Johnny Rotten would make a good combination, but the songs and the message behind them were all theirs. Whatever brought them together, they were nevertheless four guys who hated the conservative British establishment and who loved Iggy Pop, the MC5, and the Kinks. Malcolm McClaren can claim to have influenced Britpunk fashion all he wants, but the truth is that he had nothing to do with the songs. The fashion is ultimately irrelevant, but if you really give a shit, it's worth noting that Johnny Rotten was wearing a homemade "I hate Pink Floyd" t-shirt the day he met Malcolm McClaren. So bottom line, McClaren was nothing but a leech, and I am surprised that after thirty years of people who knew him saying that that you are apparently naive enough to believe his side of the story. You might do well to check out Johnny Rotten's autobiography. The Pistols burned bright for a short time and broke up when it wasn't fun anymore. They reunited when they missed the music and needed a cushion for retirement (something I would never begrudge them-in their short time together they gave a whole lot more than they received). Do your homework next time.


mhann is obviously in the right here.

You can always tell when someone's speaking the truth when they get millions of 'SHUT UP YOU IDIOT' responses.

Good posts.


kickall

lol...yeah


oh god

I can't believe i'm even giving this any effort.
But as everyone's already realised mhann24 is a snob but I would also like to call him on the point that a writer should only interview bands they respect. Why?

I'm sure a lot more people are interested in MCR's opinions on what is now a huge scene than they are about a tiny indie band. It's not as if DiS has now sacrificed the right to talk about unheard of bands.

Who loses out, seriously?

Has Diver handed away his dignity to the demons of emo-pop?

All you are arguing for is stupid concepts like pride and frankly it's shit.

Selling out is the call of a cynical twat.


I'm gonna throw in with mhann24

Not that it matters. He articulated his point very well, and in a professional manner (ie he didn't resort to childess name calling).

Never mind I happen to think MCR is garbage, too. That's irrelevant. And I disagree with mhann24 to the extent that interviewing MCR for this musiczine is actually a minor coup for DiS. Many DiS readers enjoy the band (or at least have enough curiosity to click-through to the interview else you'd not be reading this post) and so why not interview MCR? I know Diver's eclectic taste well enough to know that this band is not bloody likely to be one his favorites. But as a music journalist he's got to be able provide an able and objective article even when he might not be all that enthusiastic about the band himself. If he were writing for a family newspaper he might be called upon to interview Celine Dion - the antichrist herself! - and pose the sort of professional questions his editor expects of him. While it'd take more "British-stiff-upper-lip" than the UK could collectively muster to entirely hide his disdain in Celine's case, this type of interview isn't the time or place for a full fledged editorial piece.

Having said all that I sympathize with mhann24 because he's right. MCR is a dog shit band whose popularity completely escapes me. But then again I'm still trying to figure out who in the hell at MTV liked Dire Straits so much as to play that video so frequently I still have an occasional nightmare 20 years on, "Money for nothing and your chicks for free". Oi vey! In any event, that's what these boards are for: expressing an opinion. And that's all mhann24 has done, eh?


Never Get Cold Wearing Nothing in the Snow...

Why? Because although if Diver worked for a family newspaper he might be required to pander to the mainstream, the fact is that DiS has heretofore never been or attempted to be a mainstream publication. Their main focus has very obviously never been to generate a massive following/profits. The specialized nature of the kind of music they usually cover means an inherently limited base of readers/limited potential profit. So it was clear that they were covering the bands that they were covering out of a genuine interest/respect for their work and a desire to share a love of music with others. If that ethos is compromised by a newfound desire for profit, then the site loses major credibility as a site about music for music lovers.
As you astutely pointed out, MCR has a much larger following than the majority of bands that this site usually covers. And that combined with the fact that anyone with good taste (read:most of the writers on this site including Diver) knows that they are awful cannot help but make one suspicious that DiS may be contemplating a move that would betray themselves and their core audience in the interest of profit. If that really is true, then I guess they would be handing over both their dignity and their integrity to the "demons of emo-pop." Only Diver knows for sure. Who loses out? Well I guess everybody who liked having an alternative to Spin and Rolling Stone. It can be a very slippery slope.


"anyone with good taste"

oh dear,

i learnt long ago that 'good taste' is a really, really stupid concept.

i know people who think that all modern popular music is gash and that 'people of good taste' listen to classical music.
Conversely i also know people who think that a musician has essentially screwed up if their music is not immediately recognisable and catchy - they would consider much of the tunage on DiS to be 'bad' because of that.
I think there is plenty of scope for criticising MCR without ever having to resort to such a played-out, nonsensical concept as 'good taste'.

i'm off to listen to Nostromo; they're probably not in your definition of 'good taste' ah well, never mind...


true

he has expressed an opinion but that's what forums are for not on commenting articles.
When you like a band and want to read something on them, it disgusts you when someone disses them.
If he hates them so much then he should go to some MCR hate website and complain about it there, not here.
If your favorite band was being trashed talked wouldn't you think you'd get even a little bit upset about it?


oh,

and another thing, how the hell was mhann24's opinion articulated very well and professionally? The only thing he said was "They suck"...Woah that's so amazing and epic...yeah right.
And do you call falsely accusing MCR of certain things professional?
Wow...it's just so annoying when people want to complain about a band that they've probably never even heard the album to. And fine, if you have heard the album and you hated them then whatever, that's it. Your wasting time on something you dislike and are getting nothing out of it except a hoard of people who think of you as an asshole.
I understand opinions but not when you say a childish thing like "they suck" and especially not here.
Do you think this article was written for people who hate MCR? no, of course not so just write stuff on article's that are meant for disliking a specific band.
...don't complain about them just because they're sucessful and you can't understand why. Complain about them when they start killing people... that's when you can get mad.
And please don't start on the whole "MCR makes kids slit their wrists" because they don't. The main reason why the band started was to save lives.


You're missing the point.

My Chemical Romance are up there with Busted and the Spice Girls.

Creatures created to coax fad-following children into buying their CDs (and even their barbie dolls).

They're a bunch of soulless yanks, in it for the money.


lol.

My Chemical Romance interview.

Is this a ploy to make millions of teenage girls join up, because I doubt any of the users give a toss about this bunch of faries?


...

I thought the interview was very good. I respect this band for talking about their business in an articulate and savvy way. However, their music is still the End Of Shit and I've heard identical words spring from the lips of Limp Bizkit, Marilyn Manson and numerous other public enemy #1 bands. It almost makes me want to have a performer saying "take every lyric I write seriously. Kids, cut yourself,