IMO they did with indie rock what Nirvana did with Alternate rock. The Strokes were a paradigm shifting movement that was both critically lauded and (relatively) mainstream. Things they had done had been done before and there were groups out there doing interesting things in rock music during the early 2000s but the music on the radio and MTV2 at the time that was “Rock” was mook rock Staind, Limp Bizkit, Papa Roach, Puddle of Mudd bullshit. The Strokes were young and fucking cool. Their music was a pallet cleanser. They made some outstanding music. I was also in college at the time but my musical interest was more in line with acoustic folk and jam band type stuff. Which is fine but mostly irrelevant. Then in a short succession I had a friend introduce me to Pitchfork and The Strokes, The White Stripes and Ryan Adams all happened. This pulled me into the indie rock world hard, it opened the door for the whole NYC/Brooklyn/UK indie rock movement and while it wasn’t as profound as other rock movement in the past, it had a major impact on my musical life interests moving forward. I remember seeing all the hype build for The Strokes at the time and thinking this is gonna be contrived and phony, a bunch of spoiled rich kids making rock music. I think I actively went out of to ignore them initially but I’d be lying if I said my interest wasn’t piqued. Then I finally broke down and listen to Is This It I remember being almost disappointed that it was so fucking great, I was hoping I’d hate it but I couldn’t deny how catchy and cool it all was. I would guess the people that didn’t get The Strokes at the time were either in a good place with their own musical interests at the time (I was not) or a bit too old to get excited about ANOTHER rock revival. All of that makes total sense and is fine but for me The Strokes were an awesome band AND the tip of the spear into a larger musical landscape.
I don't want to waste the day arguing and if I come across as attacking - its really just hyperbole for effect - and I'm going to try and keep this brief.
There was no "Alt-Rock" or "indie rock" or the the other super micro-genre BS before Nirvana. Nirvana amalgamated sounds from Punk, Rock, Metal & Pop and broke the doors open and expanded the popular consciousness of what that could be and sound like, which in turn ushered in a much more expansive appreciation for a larger, more eclectic umbrella under which "rock music" would sit. Because they essentially neutered
almost everything that was "Rock" before them and because Radio and MTV wanted to slaughter the cash cow, they came up with marketing labels to explain to why you'd get Smells Like Teen Spirit followed by Set Adrift on Memory Bliss followed by White Wedding followed by It Ain't Over Till Its Over in rotation on the radio/MTV.
So I can't agree that the Strokes "did for indie rock" what Nirvana did for "Alt-rock" unless you mean, they ALSO triggered the marketing machine into action which resulted in yet another BS label being foisted on the public.
To quote another member of the
same Rock genre...."Everybody's talkin' 'bout the new sound, Funny, but it's still rock and roll to me."
Wilco's early career greatness faded a little into archetypal Dad rock.
I cannot adequately express in words the extent to which the use and thought process behind the use of the term "Dad Rock" sends me over the edge.
No. Beyond the fact that Micro-genres are bullshit, this is not one and there is no "archetypical" example of "Dad rock".
I'm a Dad.
I listen to Radiohead, I listen to Lizzo, I listen to Blood Incantation, I listen to Prince, I listen to Daft Punk, I listen to RTJ, And I listen to Wilco.
If Wilco is Dad Rock - So is Radiohead and Blood Incantation and RTJ.
every time.