How the biggest rock band in the world disappeared (Washington Post)

This is behind a paywall but all you have to do is create an account to read it for free. Agree with this writers’ opinion or not, early on in the piece they state a blatant untruth by saying all the original members of R.E.M. still live in Athens. The reason they know this is because they live there and say they see the band around town all the time. It seems to me that if they live there they would know that not all of them live there anymore. For instance, Peter Buck moved to Seattle decades ago. I’m sure some will see this as me splitting hairs. I assure you, it’s not. To my way of thinking, any responsible journalist does the legwork, including factchecking. When they don’t, it devalues their work.

As for my thoughts on the piece itself, I don’t think R.E.M. is nearly as forgotten as some people seem to believe they are. And if they are, it’s not something I blame on the fans (or anyone for that matter) as this writer does.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/interactive/2025/michael-stipe-65-birthday-rem-band/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR37I3pjB0JGbjmHaxWPOr0sTjbkWXgzEqX-x3i1aP1pWeda3ASOkuLLG2A_aem_O9aJjizbMoVhooCGokP27Q

3 Likes

Thanks for posting.

In fairness to the writer, I think they possibly all still have homes in Athens, but it’s probably only Bill’s primary residence these days.

My thoughts: they haven’t been forgotten, but I don’t think they’re revered anywhere near as highly as they should be. They deserve to be spoken about in the same way that generationally seminal bands are. Because that’s what they were. But they don’t seem to be viewed that way. I don’t really know why that is.

There are maybe 10 bands maximum, ever, with a catalogue as good as R.E.M. They influenced a generation, and continue to do so. Waxahatchee is on record as saying Stipe is her favourite lyricist, for example. But if someone commissioned a poll for best band ever, they probably wouldn’t break the top 50.

So, I get the writer’s point. And I like his line at the end. “The songs haven’t changed at all. They are there, whenever you need them.” That’s all that matters really.

1 Like

It’s kind of a non-article. It doesn’t really say much, does it? They could have replaced the whole article with…

…and had the same impact.
(I.e., I still would have read it!!! :slight_smile: )

Why are they not still big? Because they don’t want to be.

Staying in the public consciousness takes a LOT of effort – even more so when you’re not an active band anymore – and they never really seemed comfortable with that kind of thing even when their careers depended on it.

Plus – and I say this from a point of love – despite all the press around them being the biggest band in the world at one point, I’m not sure that was ever really true. As a diehard fan, it always, even at their absolute peak, felt to me like following an alternative / cult band. Automatic For The People (while undeniably successful) never even made it to #1 in the US Billboard charts (and was only #83 in the US Billboard charts for the year in 1992 – although they did better in 1993).

So in part it’s because while I think they were the best band in the world, I think part of the answer is that they never really were the biggest (despite all the press at the time that said they were).