Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Creed is not a good band

Slate magazine is part of The Washington Post-Newsweek International family, and so I love them like family. But it's hard to read this and avoid the conclusion that they should be burned to the ground.

By Ezra Klein  |  October 21, 2009; 2:54 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Lunch Break
Next: The counterintuitive conventional wisdom

Comments

You speak the truth :)

Posted by: haightc | October 21, 2009 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"...they should be burned to the ground"


That actually seems reasonable...

Posted by: JkR- | October 21, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

I suspect Ezra's anti-Christian bias is motivating him taking the time to actually post this on his blog. After all, there are are a lot of bands that suck that get good reviews. I don't see all of them on Ezra's blog.

Posted by: lancediverson | October 21, 2009 3:14 PM | Report abuse

You don't have to be anti-Christian to hate Creed. The fact that they suck is more than enough reason.

Posted by: MosBen | October 21, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

since this crap band is being promoted in a relatively prominent cultural organ that is also owned by ezra's employer. anyway, beggars the imagination.

Posted by: razibk | October 21, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Both Alter Bridge and Another Animal have done quite well on their own: Alter Bridge actually sounds better without the extra "parts" from Creed.

Posted by: rmgregory | October 21, 2009 3:30 PM | Report abuse

I don't think it's an anti-Christian bias so much as the fact that Creed is just a terrible, terrible band, with repetitive plodding songs. Listening to Creed is the musical equivalent of being subjected to a march through the desert with no water--you just want it to end, and the end cannot come soon enough. In some cases (and here I am specifically thinking of "Higher"), death would be infinitely preferable, and would be sweet relief to end the suffering.

I didn't think that this was even an issue that was open to debate. Then again, there are people who really, truly believe that the Earth is flat, and that Celine Dion is the height of musical accomplishment . . . So I acknowledge that there probably are some Creed fans out there.

For the rest of us, when you combine Creed's rank awfulness with the massive radio overplay that they received for such an extended period of time, I think the vast majority of people would agree that Ezra's comments are completely justified. I actually think he does not go far enough--I propose that the reviewer he linked to receive the full treatment that William Wallace received in Braveheart.

Posted by: bucky_katt | October 21, 2009 3:32 PM | Report abuse

I don't think it's so much that Creed is a "bad" band per se. I actually think they're pretty good at what they do. The problem is what they do is produce flabby, pretentious, cliche-ridden, unimaginative arena rock.

Posted by: Jasper99 | October 21, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

I think we should let David Cross settle this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcfTNIldmto

Posted by: DropItLikeItsHot | October 21, 2009 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Too bad the guys from 311 didn't beat down Scott Stapp a little harder back in 2005:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/8901746/scott_stapp_and_311_brawl

Posted by: BigTunaTim | October 21, 2009 4:01 PM | Report abuse

I don't think it's so much that Creed is a "bad" band per se. I actually think they're pretty good at what they do. The problem is what they do is produce flabby, pretentious, cliche-ridden, unimaginative arena rock.

Posted by: Jasper99 | October 21, 2009 3:46 PM

Seconded. I had actually completely forgotten about Creed until this article.

Posted by: CaptainNoble | October 21, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

They had a greatest hits album?

Posted by: matthewyoungblood | October 21, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

My first comment on Ezra's blog defends Creed? Yeah, I probably should have started in the shallow end first. But Creed's first album actually has some pretty good guitar work on it, and for a budding 14-year-old rocker, I liked it. It's certainly not a great band, and their over-reliance on dropped-d tuning is just lazy. But there's far worse music I used to listen to when I was 14 (the band Yes comes to mind). That said, I would never defend anything past their first album.

Posted by: ethanpollack | October 21, 2009 5:49 PM | Report abuse

I class Creed as a "guilty pleasure". Their music is derivative. They basically mastered a polished down version of Pearl Jam's "Ten" without getting into any of the "weird" experiments in the follow-up albums (or that of any other Seattle band). Creed has absolutely no edge.

Having said that, the best Creed hits do hold up in the same way that early 1970s Black Sabbath does. The comparison isn't entirely fair to Sabbath, but I'd like to think it's not entirely inapt.

The obvious flaws of the music get in the way of appreciating what it does achieve. I predict that in another decade it will be hip to appreciate Creed (even if done so with a degree of irony).

Posted by: JPRS | October 21, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

ethanpollack, I can't believe you mentioned Yes in the same sentence as Creed.

Posted by: MosBen | October 22, 2009 7:57 AM | Report abuse

"I don't think it's so much that Creed is a 'bad' band per se. I actually think they're pretty good at what they do. The problem is what they do is produce flabby, pretentious, cliche-ridden, unimaginative arena rock."

Thirded.

JPRS, the polished down version of "Ten" was Stone Temple Pilots. That makes Creed a copy of a copy. And I can't wait to see the Sabbath fans weigh in on your comparison.

Posted by: Janine1 | October 22, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Hey Ezra, if you really want to stir the pot, say something about Nickelback. (J. Free used to get a kick out of doing that on his chats.) It really brings both sides out of the woodwork.

For the record, I don't dislike them but won't defend their artistic merit either. But I would posit that Nickelback is to Daughtry is to Hinder as Pearl Jam is to STP is to Creed. (Without equating Pearl Jam to Nickelback, though.)

Posted by: Janine1 | October 22, 2009 10:53 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company