Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 12:30 PM ET, 01/ 4/2011

Lunch Break

By Ezra Klein

I've been talking with some friends lately about how you'd build the playlist for an Aughts-nostalgia party. The problem isn't coming up with bands, but coming up with bands that you're pretty certain will forever be Aughts bands,as opposed to bands that lit the world on fire in 2014. On that note, I give you the Strokes:

By Ezra Klein  | January 4, 2011; 12:30 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The history of filibuster reform
Next: The Constitution and the filibuster


Aughts-nostalgia party? I doubt any threw a 1930s nostalgia party. War+Economic Depression = Inappropriate decade to be the focus of a nostalgia party. This world couldn't take another 2000 to 2010.

Posted by: RisingTideLiftsAllBoats | January 4, 2011 12:47 PM | Report abuse

it depresses your commenters when you make posts like this... what does it say about us when you demonstrate you have no life?

Posted by: cdosquared5 | January 4, 2011 1:24 PM | Report abuse

cdosquared - You must have no life if you feel the need to make such a comment. I'm a regular reader of this blog and I enjoy posts like this. Fyi most people like music.

Posted by: mtgreen | January 4, 2011 1:51 PM | Report abuse

This is a pretty easy list to compile: go through the things labeled "indie" and/or "emo" from the early-mid 00s and see who's disappeared

The Hives
Modest Mouse
Franz Ferdinand
Fall out Boy
Panic! at the Disco
Dashbaord Confessional

Death Cab might be longed lived enough to sort of be the Pearl Jam of the era, especially if they keep touring.

Posted by: NicholasBeaudrot | January 4, 2011 2:03 PM | Report abuse

A Jeff Lynne sounding, 70's carryover Beatle band, what is that about?

How about Paramore, which has now become Paralite, and is just one last tour away from Hayley Williams solo career.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 4, 2011 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, if all Ezra ever talked about was politics, THEN I would think he had no life. People who talk about their jobs or work all the time are the ones who depress me. Work to live, not the other way around.

Or as Jack Torrance would say "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy."

Posted by: Rockbiter | January 4, 2011 2:06 PM | Report abuse

I can only hope that the Strokes, as well as the bands Nicholas Beaudrot points out remain "aughts" bands...
Hopefully the dominant rock of tomorrow will be, like popular rock in the other decades I've lived through, at least tolerable... maybe even good.

Posted by: RCBII | January 4, 2011 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Oh yeah, put Bloc Party on your list. Whether we ever get anoth Bloc Party album is up in the air. The Strokes on the other hand are releasing a new album this year.

Posted by: Rockbiter | January 4, 2011 2:13 PM | Report abuse

For non-pop, non Strokes:
Sigur Ros (on haitus)
Le Tigre (Sorry, but I think best days are gone)
The New Pornographers (hesitant to put them on there)
Sleater-Kinney (broke up) - maybe more 90's
Cat Power
The Postal Service (kinda broke up)
Lightning Bolt
Godspeed You Black Emperor!
The Rapture
Fugazi's album in 2002 was pretty slamming (haitus)
Brian Wilson album (one shot deal)
The Microphones (pretty sure he doesn't play anymore. Saw him play in a tent in a backyard - yes, a tent)

I am missing hip-hop, um, Dead Prez and Nas (illmatic was good)

Should not appear (will produce more great music):
Joanna Newsom
Sufjan Stevens

Posted by: chrisgaun | January 4, 2011 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Oh and
Q and Not U (broke up)

PS my spelling is really bad: haitus = hiatus

Posted by: chrisgaun | January 4, 2011 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Oh and
Q and Not U (broke up)

PS my spelling is really bad: haitus = hiatus


Posted by: chrisgaun | January 4, 2011 2:40 PM | Report abuse

While The Strokes were obviously the defining, most iconic band of the last decade, and their last album was awful, I think it's a really bad bet to think they won't continue to be a really important band.

The stuff that will always be thought of as "So Aughts" is more like Lil Jon, Interpol, T-Pain, and Panic at the Disco.

Posted by: michaelh81 | January 4, 2011 2:52 PM | Report abuse

I think bands that won't make the list, that is that they'll continue releasing stuff that's mostly relevent, includes The Decemberists and The Arcade Fire.

A band for the list would be Audioslave.

Posted by: MosBen | January 4, 2011 5:08 PM | Report abuse

The Killers had a pretty good run of success, but I seriously doubt they'll be setting on the world on fire in 2014.

Posted by: Jasper999 | January 4, 2011 6:53 PM | Report abuse

If you're including hip hop, there's not very much. Most of the best artists even today were either active in the 90s or will still be going for the next few years at least. There's a few though:

50 Cent
Dead Prez
Mos Def
Dilated Peoples
The Clipse
Jadakiss and D-Block
The Game
Lloyd Banks
Ja Rule
Soulja Boy
Gnarls Barkley

There's a few good names but it's not a brilliant list on the whole to be honest. Most of the best rappers were either already rapping in the 90s (Nas, Jay-Z, Common, Talib Kweli, Wu Tang members, Eminem) or are likely to keep going into the future (Kanye West, Talib Kweli, Lupe Fiasco, J.Cole, Blu, Drake, etc).

Posted by: bigmandave | January 4, 2011 8:23 PM | Report abuse

In terms of bands, Black Rebel Motorcycle Club, The Vines, The Libertines, Babyshambles and Arctic Monkeys may or may not fit the bill.

Posted by: bigmandave | January 4, 2011 8:31 PM | Report abuse

I saw The Strokes at Lollapalooza this year and their set was great. First time I'd ever seen them live. I actually think they are a better band now technically than in the early 2000's.

Hard to Explain

Posted by: jnc4p | January 4, 2011 11:41 PM | Report abuse

The Shins

@chrisgaun "Should not appear (will produce more great music): Joanna Newsom" -- who can tell the difference? I'd be happy to leave her in the 00s bin.

Posted by: Mastodon_Juan | January 5, 2011 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Ezra, I think you're going about this the wrong way. I've been thinking about a similar issue -- I'm the DJ for a 90's party this weekend (you're invited). I'm including REM, Mariah Carey, and Jay-Z on the playlist, even though they had success after 1999, because their 90s hits were some of the most important songs of the decade. Or, let me put it this way -- would you leave Elvis out of a 1950s nostalgia party just because the '68 Comeback Special was an enormous success?

Posted by: tomveiltomveil | January 5, 2011 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

characters remaining

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company