Reply #12: I think it stems from them defecting SST and signing to Warners

[RandomKoolzip]

in 86, the first band to "graduate" to the big time from SST. To understand the vitriol spewed at the Huskers back then and now, one must realize that SST in the early eighties was where ALL the action was happeneing re: rock music. Joe Carducci's book "Rock and the Pop Narcotic" paints the picture of a bunker-like, hermetically hostile environment at SST, a kind of "us against the world" to the sixth power, where grudges are held forever, a "new redneck" philosophy of getting your hands dirty with constant touring, work, practice, and work. And then some more work. All the bands on the label were supposed to uphold the same values as Greg Ginn, and when they didn't, they were shunned, Amish-like, by the label's employees.

When Husker Du signed to Warner Brothers, immediately, according to legend, the SST staff started badmouthing the band to publicists, zine interviewers, and college radio consultants; apparently Ginn had held it against Mould, Hart, and Norton that they weren't "redneck" enough, that they were getting progressively poppier, and that they claimed in interviews that signing to a major might be a good idea. Thus, Husker Du became the first victim of an indie backlash.

As to why the band is not as fondly remembered as they ought to be today, I think it's because we as music fans have had to put up with so many Husker copyists over the years; what sounded so fresh and exciting in the mid eighties became a formula, and driven into the ground. Also, Bob Mould making an ass of himself in Sugar (a wretched excuse for a rock band) hasn't exactly endeared him to his previous fans. His new solo record is also terrible, a techno-synth mess, devoid of rock.

As for myself, I'll always love the Huskers; they helped me get through High School. I hold no ill will toward them at all. Sorry for being so long-winded, but I'm kind of an SST junkie/scholar and can't help myself.