This may be the author’s version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source: Thackray, Jerry (2015) In search of Nirvana: Why Nirvana: The true story could never be ’true’. Popular Music and Society, 38(2), pp. 194-207. This file was downloaded from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/81973/ c Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under a Creative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use and that permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the docu- ment is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then refer to the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recog- nise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe that this work infringes copyright please provide details by email to [email protected] Notice: Please note that this document may not be the Version of Record (i.e. published version) of the work. Author manuscript versions (as Sub- mitted for peer review or as Accepted for publication after peer review) can be identified by an absence of publisher branding and/or typeset appear- ance. If there is any doubt, please refer to the published source. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007766.2014.994326 In Search of Nirvana: Why Nirvana: The True Story Could Never Be ‘True’ Jeremy Thackray In my book Nirvana: The True Story (2006), I undertake an autoethnographical approach to biography, attempting to impart an understanding of my chosen subject—the rock band Nirvana—via discussion of my own experiences. On numerous occasions, I veer off into tangential asides, frequently using extensive footnotes to explain obscure musical references. Personal anecdotes are juxtaposed with ‘insider’ information; at crucial points in the story (notable concerts, the first meeting of singer Kurt Cobain with his future wife Courtney Love, the news of Cobain’s suicide), the linear thread of the narrative spills over into a multi- faceted approach, with several different (and sometimes opposing) voices given equal prominence. Despite my first-hand experience of the band, however, Nirvana: The True Story is not considered authoritative, even within its own field. This articles considers the reasons why this may be the case. The Researcher as Participant/Observer Working under my nom de plume Everett True, I have a 30-year track record as a prominent music critic, being held responsible for the discovery of several critically acclaimed and lucrative musical genres (‘grunge,’ ‘cutie,’ ‘C86’), and I have published and edited several prominent music publications, primarily U.K.-based (Plan B Magazine, Careless Talk Costs Lives, Melody Maker, VOX, et al.) that have served as breeding grounds for other music critics. I am an active blogger, publish a music criticism website, and am regularly quoted in publications—both academic and online—as a respected source. I often focus upon my own experiences while acting as a critic in an attempt to reach a deeper understanding of my subjects. In this, my professional writing style is similar to that of the autoethnographical 1 approach undertaken by academic researchers. I am subjective in my opinions, but—as a primary source—objective in my observations. As Carolyn Ellis and Arthur Bochner explain in The Handbook of Qualitative Research (739-43), autoethnography is a form of writing that places emphasis on the researcher’s own experiences and treats them as an area of investigation, rather than rely on disembodied observation. Brisbane-based academic Mike Howlett summarizes it thus: Autoethnography is an autobiographical or narrative genre of writing that displays multiple layers of consciousness, connecting the personal to the cultural. It asks readers (and author) to feel the truthfulness or worthwhileness of its accounts and to become co-participants, engaging with the storyline and its phenomena morally, emotionally, aesthetically, and intellectually. (3) My primary motivation for writing about music is to make sense of my own life, and so when I write rock biographies—I have written several—I utilize a form of writing that is part- memoir, part-archivist, and part-music journalism. I insert myself into the story where I feel it is appropriate to do so, to help to illuminate a particular anecdote. I feel that to do otherwise would be ‘inauthentic’ or dishonest, particularly when the story involves events of which I have first-hand experience. I acknowledge that by doing so I am relying upon anecdotal evidence—my own memories shared with others—but I am also aware that all biographies ultimately rely upon such evidence, whether experienced first-hand or collated together at a later point. I undertake this autoethnographical approach because I believe it allows me to utilize my own personal narrative to give a deeper and broader insight into the wider narrative of the band whose story I am telling. By doing so, I am following a timeworn path for rock writers—from Lester Bangs and the gonzo journalism of Hunter S. Thompson 2 onwards—one that places value on empathy for its subject rather than on a dispassionate (or sensationalist) presentation of the ‘facts.’ It is important to realize that I, Bangs and Thompson, are not as concerned with assembling a factually correct linear narrative (which we feel cannot be assembled anyway), as getting the story across. For, as academic Marc Brennan argues, “Music journalism’s textual feature is less about truth than it is about trust” (12). Popular music commentator Simon Frith writes, “In rock biographies we see not the stars at work but the star makers, the fans and journalists and critics through whose mediations musical lives are continually being defined and measured and made meaningful” (277). Although I have never thought of my role as a music critic in these particular words before, I acknowledge the truth in them—particularly when it comes to the pivotal role I played in regards to both Nirvana and ‘grunge’. Everett True was without question the key journalist who documented the rising Seattle music scene of the late 80’s/early 90’s. In fact, his articulate, enthusiastic support for Nirvana and other Seattle groups on the Sub Pop label helped to propel the culture to international prominence. Furthermore, Everett not only extensively interviewed and documented Nirvana throughout their career, he even performed with them onstage, and introduced the singer Kurt Cobain to his future wife Courtney Love. As such, he worked as both an insider and an observer, both documenting history, and facilitating in its unfoldment. (Personal correspondence with Bruce Pavitt, founder of Sub Pop Records, 2014) 3 Nirvana: The True Story—True, but not ‘True’? What is it with English rock journalists? Just from the title (Nirvana: The True Story—geddit?) I should have known—this is another self-promotional exercise a la Nick Kent1, in which the writer attempts to convince us that he’s as important as his ostensible subjects … being a friend of the band does not qualify you to write their biography—it qualifies you to be interviewed by a real biographer. (Winch) It has long puzzled me why scholars of popular music and fans of Nirvana do not treat my book Nirvana: The True Story, published by Omnibus Press in the U.K. in 2006 (and reprinted by Da Capo in the U.S. in 2007 as Nirvana: The Biography) with more respect— why it is not placed on an equal standing with the other two ‘big’ Nirvana biographies, Seattle music journalist Charles Cross’s (made-for-Hollywood, Courtney Love-approved) Heavier Than Heaven: A Biography of Kurt Cobain, and Rolling Stone writer Michael Azerrad’s Come as You Are: The Story of Nirvana (1993), the ‘official’ biography, written with the band’s approval and input, and published before singer Kurt Cobain’s suicide in 1994. It is a matter of record that I conducted several keynote interviews with the Olympia, WA, band2 during their lifetime, that I performed on stage with the band on a number of occasions, and that I was responsible for bringing to the public consciousness the musical movement with which they were associated—grunge.3 I have been credited with introducing their singer Kurt Cobain to his wife Courtney Love,4 and Nirvana: The True Story5 has been translated into over a dozen languages. In other words, what the above quote from a disgruntled reader fails to address is that I was both a ‘friend’ of the band and a writer. Although influence can be problematic to determine, it is possible to at least partly quantify the lack of regard for Nirvana: The Biography through use of web stats. For 4 example, on Google Scholar—a resource used by academics to help verify the authority of books and academic papers through the number of citations listed—we find the following: Come as You Are: The Story of Nirvana, cited by 53 (Google Scholar, 16 Jan. 2014) Heavier Than Heaven: A Biography of Kurt Cobain, cited by 56 (Google Scholar, 16 Jan. 2014) Nirvana: The Biography, cited by 4 (Google Scholar, 16 Jan. 2014) Even an anthology like Gina Arnold’s Route 666: On the Road to Nirvana—so tagged (with the band’s name in the title) to cash in on the popularity of Nirvana—has been cited 40 times.6 At Goodreads.com—a popular book recommendation website fuelled by user- generated content—it is apparent that weight of numbers alone negates any chance Nirvana: The Biography has of being considered authoritative.