[reprise85]

Originally Posted by Rairun

I used to think so as a teenager, I guess? But now it strikes me as a meaningless question to ask. Culturally, no, the pumpkins didn't turn out to be that important. Musically, I think they were very creative, but some of their peers were more inventive and acclaimed - Radiohead, Björk, etc? They certainly weren't leagues ahead of everyone else.

But I think they made music that was very good at speaking to people with a certain type of upbringing - basically kids who went through some form of abuse and were trying to figure out how to navigate their lives in the aftermath. Maybe it's just my age showing, but I feel that bands like My Chemical Romance tap into some sort of generic feeling of out-of-placeness, some teenage desire to be different. Again, maybe I'm biased, but I don't think the Pumpkins are like that at all. All these years later, I still feel Billy truly grappled with the meaning of being shaped by abuse. He didn't find any resolution; apparently he never did find a way to transform and move beyond his past. But you can't listen to his old music and tell me he wasn't burning with the desire to do just that, even if he didn't know how or why. He was very good at conveying just how alone and different his experiences made him feel, and he was reaching out for something, anything, in all his dysfunctional glory.

They are still up there with my personal favorites. But they aren't alone there either. I feel very similarly about Sufjan's music. In the past few years, I fell in love with Adrianne Lenker's music. They speak to me just as much as the Pumpkins ever did.

So I guess the answer is no, they aren't special, not in a universal sense. They're special to me, though.

this 100%

in fact, I think any kids (say, under 15) who were obsessed with SP in the 90s should have been red-flagged for CPS investigation

only kidding a little. but I do think it was a huge red flag that I loved them so much when I was like 11 years old.