Music has changed so much through the years, that it is almost impossible to calculate the origins of certain forms of it. Blues became prominent in the 1940’s and ‘50’s, while rock and roll emerged as a powerhouse in the 1960’s. A now mainstream sub genre of rock, alternative, has remained a popular type of music since around the 1970’s. Its origins are most commonly agreed upon to be around 1967, after the release of the album: The Velvet Underground & Nico, from the group The Velvet Underground. A unique compilation displaying a never before heard sound and honest, dark lyrics, it was initially a commercial failure. Years after, though, when lead singer Lou Reed had embarked on a successful solo career, the album gained notoriety, as did the rest of the band’s recordings. They have since been dubbed by many as the first “alternative” band, as no other group before them had arranged urban-noir verses and a primal guitar sound with avant garde, distortion-heavy undertones. Their originality and style paved the way for many of the sounds we know and love today, and left a template for future artists to evolve upon. 

Alternative rock is still quite prevalent these days, and has been basically since the ‘70’s. It is what I grew up listening to on the radio as well. The late 90’s and early 2000’s were an interesting time for music to say the least, but my mother was sure to keep her D.J. status up to par. I remember hearing bands like Weezer, Blink-182, Nirvana (if she was feeling edgier) -- I could go on for days; my point is that these bands were and are still getting significant air time on the radio, Spotify, etc., and they fall under the genres of music that the VU pioneered. Weezer is alternative/rock. Blink-182 is alternative/punk. Nirvana is alternative/grunge. Of those three bands, Nirvana remains the most popular, and their sound is arguably the most derivative of VU. In fact, a Rolling Stone article titled “The 40 Most GroundBreaking Albums of All-time” connects The Velvet Underground & Nico and Nirvana’s infamous Nevermind record. The piece on VU reads: 

Combining Lou Reed's skills honed as a staff songwriter at Pickwick Records, the possibilities of John Cale's time exploring drones with La Monte Young and the austere, nearly cymbal-less drumming of Maureen Tucker, The Velvet Underground & Nico became a singular and slow-selling cornerstone in an alternative unfolding of rock history (Rolling Stone).

I have to say, this is one of the best ways to describe the band/that record that I have read in an anything thus far about the band. It perfectly describes the eccentricity of the group, and how their sound was just different. It also mentions Lou Reed’s experience as a writer, which is something that I find so interesting. Nevertheless, I will get to that later. Rather than touching on the relationship between Nevermind and the Velvet Underground & Nico in the analyses of the two records, there is instead an interesting graphic on the bottom of their portions that reads “related records,” and lists the two albums on one another’s section -- one of the other albums in this mix was the Ramones’ debut record. The piece shows how VU’s debut record rubbed off on other artist’s works, including the likes of Nirvana and the Ramones -- not too shabby.

These three records relate most as a whole on the basis of punk rock. The Velvets undoubtedly influenced punk with their dark lyrics regarding drugs and sex and experimental rhythm. The Ramones helped punk break through as a genre with their record. Their minimalist attire and short, to the point songs were punky statements in themselves. Nirvana essentially popularized and glamorized the genre in their record with Kurt Cobain’s perfectly undone style and angsty yet captivating lyrics. As the article reads, Nirvana “brought shine to punk and punk to the charts” (Rolling Stone). I could not have said it better myself. All three records do also feature pop aspects too, which I find so interesting. One would probably think of pop and punk as opposites, but in records like these, they mesh perfectly. Because of the pop sensibilities featured in Nirvana’s album especially, a wider audience was able to relate to and enjoy the music. While one could argue that some of the songs by the Velvets certainly don’t appeal to all audiences, they do feature a couple of poppier songs on their first record. The Ramones expanded upon this sound and exemplified what punk could be, while Nirvana arguably perfected the punk sound into something that is still blasted through radios everywhere.

Judging by the fact that the band is said to have so greatly influenced bands like Nirvana and the Ramones, surely they must be as much if not more influential than a band like, say, the Beatles, right? A piece published on BBC.com proposes this argument exactly. Written by Greg Kot, this article speaks of the subgenres that the band cultivated and the bands in which they influenced. I do not think I have ever heard someone dare to argue that the Velvet Underground were a more influential band than the beloved Beatles. Nonetheless, Kot makes some claims that truly put this idea into perspective: 

But time has validated the Velvets’ unsentimental music; it has become a touchstone for subsequent generations of music-makers. values that made The Velvet Underground such pariahs in the ‘60s – the do-it-yourself, under-produced record-making; the utter disregard for fashion; the sceptical, sometimes cynical attitude – were right in line with ‘70s punk, ‘80s indie rock and ‘90s alternative music (Kot). 

Just as I previously mentioned, their style and influence can be easily seen especially within these realms of the musical world, as the Ramones were arguably the face of ‘70’s punk -- The Sex Pistols make an interesting argument -- and Nirvana were undoubtedly the face of alternative in the ‘90’s. Kot also goes on to give insight upon their influentiality with a quote from Sterling Morrison, guitarist in the VU, reading: ‘ “We were the original alternative band,” Morrison told me in 1993, “not because we wanted to be, but because we were shunned into it. For us there was no alternative” ’(Kot). This is an interesting and very insightful point made by Morrison. There really was no alternative music at the time, and their particular blend of viola, distorted guitars, drones, harrowing lyrics, and pop sensibility was literally unlike anything before them. So, they were classified as alternative. While I suppose it’s safe to say alternative is the most accurate genre to label the VU as, they also have been called experimental and art rockers, two other sub genres they also helped to popularize. While there is no true test to say that the Velvets are “as influential” as the Beatles, it is quite evident that their music touched the brains and souls of the artists that ventured to listen to it, and those artists went on to adapt upon these sensibilities to continue to form our expanding world of music.

Music and culture always have and always will have a relationship. Perhaps nowadays the circumstances of the world are a bit different, but it is not outrageous to say that the 1960’s were a time when this was especially true. The flower power jams that ruled the decade fueled the hearts and senses of many stoned hippies longing for peace, but did not account for the more rebellious side of man. That is where the Velvets came in. Even though their music never really broke through the main stream in the 1960’s, it was evident that their work longed to be deliberately different from the chart topping hits of the decade. Instead of sounding like the Beatles or Beach Boys, the Velvets wanted to defy the norm and rebel against the constraints that were counterculture and rock music at the time. An article from volume of 3 of Popular Music and Society titled “ ‘I’m Set Free…’: The Velvet Underground, 1960’s Counterculture, and Michael Foucalt,” reads of this intriguing relationship between music and society, and how they affected each other during this time period. He explains perfectly how the Velvets were a radicalist band and how they exemplified this in their song making. He writes:

The points of difference with counterculture were almost endless -- psychedelic drugs/heroin and amphetamines; free love/S&M; good times/bad times; West Coast optimism/Eastern cynicism; heterosexuality/homosexuality; transcendence/negation; community/alienation; popularity/obscurity. On its 1967 West Coast tour into the heart of the US counterculture, the band alienated hip entrepreneur Bill Graham and critics like Will Gleason, who described them as “the urban evil of New York,” while Variety termed them “a three-ring psychosis that assaults the senses” (Bannister 164). 

This quote in of itself describes the band’s attitude toward rock and roll; toward their careers in general. They were just going to do what they wanted to do. The counterculture of the time resulted in them wanting to rebel, which in turn would affect the next decade’s counterculture, which would come to feature a similar “we do not give a shit” style: punk. 

Regardless of how many Rolling Stone critics herald the band in their articles, there are those who must not be fans of their music and voice. Whilst trying to find evidence of someone bashing the band, I only found two pieces that negatively address the band. The first, is only mentioned in the documentary,  The Velvet Underground: Under Review, about the band. Apparently -- according to an unnamed interviewee in the film -- the Velvets essentially took reviews that bashed them, and put them on the back cover. While I could not find any photo evidence of this, I do take this man’s word for it that they did on the original cover. The other negative connotation I found the band exposed to was an article that exposed the writer’s ideas of songs by the band that are the “worst to make out to.” While the article is clearly intended to be humorous, it was pretty interesting to see someone analyze Reed’s lyrics in situations where they would be uncomfortable, or just plain bizarre. As I mentioned before, it really is quite difficult to find evidence online of someone not praising the band, but there are certainly people out there who don’t enjoy their music and feel that it is not ideal for certain everyday situations. 

Lead singer Lou Reed was the definition of one of a kind, and did not care if you thought his music was bizarre or not. A man who dared to write of sadomasochism in honor of an old book and of heroin addicts looking to nullify their life, he was a strange beast in the era in which he originated. Before he was releasing controversial tracks, though, he was a student at Syracuse University, and studying journalism, film directing, and creative writing. Since he grew up to be a world famous rock star, most of Reed’s college years do not need to be included in an event for event timeline of his life. One important thing that can be taken away from his years at university, though, is the fact that that is where he found his writing mentor. The poet Delmore Schwartz was Reed’s professor, and they developed a bond that eventually would help spur great creativity out of the mind of Reed. Schwartz poetry reads of great realism, just like Reed’s lyrics. He often wrote of the failures of his generation, and did not have a problem touching on the drearier aspects of life, while sometimes maintaining a satirical tone. Reed essentially would go on to do the same in his lyrics, but first, he worked as a staff song writer at Pickwick Records. He assembled a song titled “The Ostrich,” which his superiors thought could be a hit, but it incidentally was not. Reed would go on to meet avant garde artist John Cale, whilst working, and they began to play together and discuss their desire to combine avant-garde and rock. They quickly recruited Sterling Morrison and Maureen Tucker at guitar and drums, and the rest is history. This crew would go on to, as a USA Today article published shortly after Reed’s death reads, try to “drag pop-culture consciousness toward the dark side with an experimental-sounding, arty work exploring addiction, decadence and deviancy” (Shriver). During the inception of the band, they performed at Andy Warhol’s “Exploding Plastic Inevitable” as the house band for a bit, while he “produced” their work. He did not have any real musical experience, but nights at his factory featuring the show must have been quite a bizarre time. A piece featured in the Grey Room 08, Summer 2002 publication by the name of, “My Mind Split Open: Andy Warhol’s Plastic Inevitable,” describes the experience as “an overwhelming expanded cinema production” (Joseph 81). While these productions only lasted from 1967-68, they certainly helped to heighten the Velvet’s weird, experimental aesthetic. Their popularity was increased even more when Reed would leave the group in 1970 and embark on a solo career, which would feature his big hit single, “Walk On the Side.” Once Reed’s name became one of relevance, a corner was turned and suddenly the Velvet’s music mattered more than anyone had realized before. It was viewed as truly revolutionary. 

The Velvet Underground are directly responsible for influencing much of the prevalent music from the 1970’s until today, and the debt that they are owed for this will never truly be repaid. Their exclusive blend of tunes influenced punks, proto-punks, and alt-rock gods. While the Beatles, for example, are a much more beloved band for their classic music and, as a piece featured in the International Journal of Cultural Policy puts it, “the Beatles paved the way for a plethora of beat groups” (Van Der Hoeven 263), they did not directly have a part in as many sub genres as the Velvets. That’s just it -- the Velvets were not a “beat group.” They can’t be classified to any one genre, and that is why they are so important to the evolution of music. They are especially to important to alternative music, which is a term that can mean a lot of things. Their influence can be seen from the roots of alternative, which they ultimately planted, up to the several different variations of the alternative genre. As a lover of music and especially of the many sub genres of alternative, I am inexplicably thankful for this band. 
