Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Nick Is Nothing Without Hits

(For what it's worth, of course she's a great singer, but...)

I've witnessed a few people lately talking about how Nick needs to give up the Grinderman "shit" and focus on making more "hits".

Since when does Nick have to make huge hits to make good music? Are you kidding me? To say he needs to have another huge hit is just...whatever. He's made many great songs that were nowhere near the commercial level "Where the Wild Roses Grow" was, but I would say they're even better. He doesn't need a huge hit on the charts to make good music.

Sorry, but this is something I really feel strongly about. Like, if you don't have a hit on the charts, you're music isn't good? Um, no, it just means you're not catering to everyone's idea of what is catchy/poppy/etc.

The fact that so many people NEED brainless, catchy pop drivel is WHY he isn't more famous than he is. I prefer my music thought-provoking and genuine, not radio-friendly, polished, and unoriginal for the sake of making a cheap buck. Thanks.

I wouldn't mind if a song was a hit, but with his stuff, he doesn't need commercial success to be great in my eyes.



  1. I agree! A musician who is popular doesn't necessarily = good. On the other hand, I don't think that all music on top 40 stations immediately = bad.

  2. I TOTALLY AGREE. Nick is a wonderful performer. I prefer music that makes me think, that means something.