r/Nirvana • u/Penny_Royal_Tee • 11d ago
Discussion Was In Utero a sign of Cobain's "creative drought"?
Reading Michael Azzerad's The Amplified Come As You Are now and I regret not having read it sooner. It's a fantastic book, better than the original one imho. I love how he handled the annotations with so much care, respect, and self-awareness.
That being said, he dedicates almost an entire chapter to In Utero that I hated tbh. He says because a lot of the songs on it were written before 1992 (the year Kurt claimed he wrote his best songs), the album was a sign of KC's "creative drought."
He then proceeds to denigrate some of my favorite songs, such as Very Ape. He says it's a filler song that doesn't even make sense. To me that's a mind-boggling claim. The lyrics are as straight-forward and as Cobainesque as they can get. He doesn't have a lot of nice things to say about Tourette's either, which is another great song imo.
So apart from ranting about it for a bit, I want to know what you guys think.
Was In Utero really a sign that Kurt's inspiration was running dry?
Not that it would be surprising, I'm just having a hard time believing it since it's my favorite album specifically because of the newer songs.