Nirvana
Nevermind

Many believe this to be a revolutionary album. And this is generally a reason for controversy among genre enthusiasts, because in the end, it is absurd to think that an album could have or can change something, especially today. Yet, far from fanaticisms, the revolution of "Nevermind" can be explained.

The Nirvana had already recorded an album in 1989, "Bleach," for Sub Pop, an independent label. In 1991 Nirvana signed with Geffen, a Universal affiliate, a major label. In September of that same year, "Nevermind" was released, and with it, Nirvana achieved worldwide fame. It is known that a major label has a lot more opportunities in terms of the distribution, and not just materially, of the record: from the suburbs of Seattle, Nirvana reached all homes, through TV, newspapers, and more. Some, as usual, scream miracle, the resurrection of rock 'n roll, others see Nirvana as spokespersons of a generational revolution. Probably, Nirvana did neither one nor the other. And yet they were revolutionary: musically because with their style they renewed the rock song, on an 'ideological' level because, whether they wanted it or not, as artists, they were spokespersons for instances common to individuals of their time.

There are those who saw too much and those who saw too little in Nirvana. The kids who watched them on MTV saw Nirvana as a symbol of a revolution, within reach, and short-term. But Nirvana never wanted to rebel against someone or something: in the end, "Smells like teen spirit," far from being a rebellious or generational anthem, is a piece that only highlights the contradictions inherent in any kind of revolutionary aspirations. The provocation is already in the title: a contrast to certain segments of the audience, whose push for opposition was reduced to a discrimination of clothing, and at the same time, a questioning of the same claim of opposition, also in relation to the mechanisms of historical and natural order. In this sense, the track is also an act of accusation towards the previous generation, that of '68, which as Cobain wrote: "was a step away from changing things" only to retreat, inexorably, under political and media pressures, demonstrating the substantial vacuity of certain choices related to adolescence.

Similarly, the same theme is highlighted in "In bloom," and more explicitly: "he's the one who likes all our pretty songs and he likes to sing alone...but he doesn't know what it means...". The album then contains historic tracks: "Come as you are," with its famous bass intro, "Polly", a gentle composition inspired by a news item for Cobain, "Territorial pissings", with a strong punk attitude, concluding with the melancholic yet evocative "Something in the way". Legendary tracks that made "Nevermind" a classic of Rock, but certainly not revolutionary, especially from a strictly technical standpoint: Nirvana did not invent anything new, not even grunge. Although the boundaries between musical genres are blurred, the album encompasses very different musical influences, which cannot make it think of an autonomous genre: punk roots blend with hard rock, with Beatles-influenced pop, or American country: and that's why we cannot define Nirvana as the inventors of a new genre called 'grunge'. What I, musically, define as 'grunge' is quite different from Nirvana's music. Simply put, Nirvana, from the reworking of an established tradition, managed to create a different sound, but not new, whose originality lay precisely in grafting different musical attitudes onto different schemes. In this sense, they perhaps created a new genre that ultimately synthesized the rock song, but that was quite different from the Seattle sound. Moreover, if "Nevermind" was revolutionary, it is not due to purely musical aspects. From this point of view, we can even trivialize Cobain's work, I think it's fair. Besides, the banner of youthful rebellion, "Smells like teen spirit," dwelled too much on a Pixies' score. But one certainly doesn’t start from the Pixies.

The underground rock groups of the same period, the Pixies themselves, the Melvins, the Mudhoney, groups Nirvana was inspired by and who were fundamental in shaping their style, although exerting significant influence, cannot be said to have been revolutionary precisely for their being tied to the underground. "Nevermind," however, could represent the beginning of a real revolution because it drew strength from the participation of the masses. If "Nevermind" can be considered the celebration of the insignificance of the revolution, here the democratic policy with which the album was produced and distributed translates into the actual possibility, for everyone, and here lies the ‘revolution’, to access a world, a new and alternative way of conceiving music and life. The aim of a revolution is never achieved. Whether it's a '68, a '77 or, in this case, a 1991, really... it doesn't matter. Human nature is always there, firm, stable, encoded in millennia of history. The only possible success of a revolution does not lie so much in determining historical turning points, but rather in being able to change the life of the individual. And that is precisely why Nirvana were revolutionary.

Because by selling themselves to the media, they exploited the only possible way to make Rock today: to exercise an opposition by using the very means of the system, being "the missing link", the one that creates a breach, alone, but that alone manages to dismantle an entire chain. Although being only the tip of an iceberg, the smallest part of an ideal world that in those years was resurrecting somewhere in North America, "Nevermind" opened a path for many of us, a path that in other respects, would surely have been more difficult to trace. One certainly doesn’t start with the Pixies!