It’s been over a year now since Billy Corgan announced to the world that he wanted to “renew and revive the Smashing Pumpkins.” The Tribune article was a great teaser that has yet to deliver. Don’t get me wrong I know the rumors are true and in fact he’s in the studio right now in L.A. However I guess the bigger questions is not if but why if it’s just him and Jimmy Chamberlin representing the “New” Smashing Pumpkins?

I know it would be great to hear all of those great tunes again that he hasn’t played live since Decenber 2nd of 2000 when the Pumpkins officially broke up at Chicago’s Metro. Blah blah blah. But why not play those songs anyway as Billy Corgan, Zwan or whatever you want to become next? Does it really feel right without James Iha and D’arcy back in the fold as well? Not to me.

One of the things that made the Pixies reunion work so well and not turn into Frank Black’s Pixies was the simple fact it was the Pixies. When you looked on stage it wasn’t just Frank in the spotlight it was also Kim Deal smiling back at you puffing a cigarette and it was Joey Santiago with a little less hair on guitar backed by magic lover David Lovering hiding in the shadows on drums. Of course it’s the music but it’s also the people that you grew up with connected to those songs as well that makes the band, isn’t it?

I recently watched the Smashing Pumpkins Greatest Hits Video Collection and it brought me back to the decade of the 1990’s. A decade that was a total mess for me but the music was so fucking great. One of those bands was the Pumpkins with songs like the beautiful “Drown” from the Singles soundtrack to the perfection of pop with “Today”. Billy and the band delivered a perfect amount of distortion along with thought provoking lyrics that helped me to get through that difficult time in my life. Billy might have been behind most of it in the studio if not all of it but it was everyone else that helped to make it work live.

So in closing if you say things like "I want my band back, and my songs, and my dreams" then really mean it. While all of the original members are still alive and kicking shouldn't you do it the right way or not at all? I know you were the genius behind the Pumpkins there’s no question in my mind, all I’m saying is the sum of the parts equal the whole. Without that all you have is the Smashing Pumpkins in name only with two original members.

• Random Noise appears on the second Tuesday of every month, exclusively in Lumino Magazine.

Comments

wrong Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 10:53:28 obviously never saw the pumpkins live. obviously don't get how bands work.     d'arcy was crap. period. she screwed up constantly, she had no stage presence. crap.    james was good, but replacable. his solos were not up to par, his playing was nervous.     the band always has been billy and jimmy.     and you said, billy was the whole thing in the studio? wrong. it was billy AND jimmy in the studio. d'arcy and james turned up and played but then billy rerecorded their work because it wasn't good enough, that alone created a lot of resentment by the lesser members towards billy but how can you blame the guy for doing it when he was clearly right and his managers and producers supported that decision? anyway that's another issue.     fact is that when the pumpkins toured machina and machina 2 they did it without d'arcy, yet you don't claim that "not to be the real pumpkins" so you kind of just f'd up your own argument right there.    in other words, don't be so immature. billy and jimmy are the pumpkins. d'arcy should have gone after gish, james could have stayed as long as he wanted but he was ultimately replacable. billy or jimmy leaves and the band is no longer what it once was (adore). think before ya open your mouth bud.

Yes Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 13:31:46 I agree with the above comments. Jimmy and Billy are The Smashing Pumpkins. The presence of the other two would be a bonus but not necessary.

I Agree Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 13:35:28 As a true fan, I've seen the Pumpkins play live over 20+ times. I have always loved the music, but I wasted a lot of time waiting for something that didn't exist from D'arcy and James.......a true passion for the music. In the end, D'arcy was more of a distraction than anything, and James never showed much zeal for what the Pumpkins stood for. When I listen now I hear Billy and Jimmy, not just literally, but figuratively in how they delivered the charisma and meaning of the music. I would be more than satisfied to see replacements who further the love for the music, rather than the original members who distracted from it.

Wow. Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 15:13:03 You can all claim your arguments are right but at the end of they day, you're not Billy, or James, or Jimmy, or D'arcy. You weren't with them in the studio and all you can do is speculate. No one can say "you're wrong, I'm right." when all you have is your opinions.     Let's just wait and see, shall we?

More Agreement Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 16:35:08 Whoever wrote this article needs to study up on their Pumpkins info a bit...D'arcy and James were the backup band as far as I'm concerned...Jimmy and Billy were the heart.

In Response to "Wow" Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 18:23:12 As a fan, I don't need to know the members personally in order to recognize their respective contributions to the band as a whole. We, the fans, are what this is all about. All other critics can go take a flying leap as far as I'm concerned.    Here is what we do know, D'arcy was disruptive and problematic, and James always appeared as if he'd rather have been somewhere else (Watch some old footage, and you'll see what I mean). We can all do without them, whereas the absence of Billy and/or Jimmy would be detrimental to the whole idea of the "Pumpkins". All I want is the music, and to watch those members who love the music as much as I do to be on stage playing that music. Even if Billy is as arrogant as some have tried to make him out to be, I don't care. All I want is the music and the angst/love/passion, that the music was created with, to shine through the musicians who play it now.     In a perfect world, James and D'arcy would care enough to be there with the "new" Pumpkins. But based upon what they've shown us fans for the past 15+ years, I highly doubt they'll be along for the ride.    So screw 'em!!!

horrible article Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 18:39:08 billy and jimmy are the pumpkins. james and d'arcy in the beginning, were all for the music, coming to practice, giving new ideas, doing their part. however, once MC&IS was released they were too cool for music and started to stray away for their original love. And since then it was downhill for the pumpkins, though I love all the later albums almost equally. Billy said that he wouldn't play Pumpkins songs without them because they didn't have that "click" when the original members were around and I agree, it's hard to play songs that you've played for so long with two of your friends. D'arcy and James (as far as I can tell) don't care about the band anymore. Of course, when Billy does most of the composition and lyrics, they don't have much of their hearts in it, so I respect their decision some what and I know it was a hard one to make. Jame's had some great slide guitar featured on ...said sadly and d'arcy had some great vocals that made the songs featuring them irreplaceable by other musicians. Billy must learn that there are people in this world that aren't on his same level and will do anything to take the easy path in life and he must not let this get him down! I really hope he continues to make music for life cause it's the only thing I can see him doing well. I hope Jimmy decides to do the same, but he needs to spend time with his baby and wife especially while they're both young! -josh

wow, crazy... Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 18:47:35 this is crazy!!!    anyway...    I think that it would be best if all the pumpkins were back, but unless billy's wonderful surprise is to have james and d'arcy back, the odds are not for the better. I'd love to have all the originals, but it's alright if they're not there. they survived adore, and machina.. i think they'll do fine.

hope for a zombie Written by Guest on 2007-03-01 13:29:30 i am looking forward with high hopes and realistic expectations for the new pumpkins album. i believe in billy. however, here are my reservations.     zwan had jimmy chamberlain and billy corgan. zwan had some great guitar playing on it. zwan had a more talented woman on bass. paz l'enchantin, also featured on the first a perfect circle album, mer de noms, added sublime backup vocals, played occasional violin, rocked the bass, and dripped sex. i, unlike many people, liked zwan. i really did. i was going through a rough, lonely time. and billy's new songs invigorated me in a way i needed at the time. but i don't think anyone thinks of the zwan album as a smashing pumpkins album under a pseudonym. the smashing pumpkins, though mercurial to the last, have a certain spirit to them. the spirit on the zwan album is different. so if the new smashing pumpkins is comprised of billy and jimmy, plus two or three "other people," how does this differ from zwan in anything but name?    furthermore, there is the vexing issue of TheFutureEmbrace. billy had shown plenty of evidence that he could get into a studio by himself, and with very little guitar and lots of electronics, emerge with amazing music. think "eye" and "blissed and gone." i personally love "Adore" above all things. i love all other pumpkins music deeply and passionately as well, especially some of their hardest and some of their most austere, from "tales of a scorched earth" to "medellia of the grey skies." i realize my love of "Adore" will make everything that i have to say invalid for certain idiots. that's fine.     what happened on TheFutureEmbrace? did anyone like it? i really like TheCamerEye and a couple other songs, but overall, it's painful to see one of your adolescent heroes take a fall like that.     and we're not even going to touch the "poetry" book. we all read those lyric booklets with the reverential awe one usually reserves for the bible, dhammapada, or koran. we knew the man had a power over words that took away our breath and nailed us to our seats. so, i'm not even going to mention the feelings i had trying to read "blinking with fists."     after all this, i still love billy corgan, believe passionately in his ability as an artist, and hold only danny carey above jimmy in my personal list of favorite living drummers.    i believe the smashing pumpkins were an entity and a vehicle for billy corgan to express himself from one point in time to another. i think that period of time came to an end. i think what happened when he set forth with zwan and then the solo album sent a few cannonballs into his seemingly invincible ego. i think since his spiritual conversion he is a different person and i think he has understandably and naturally matured as a human being and that there comes a time when a grown man shouldn't be writing "hello kitty kat" or "zero" or "geek usa" anymore. i think listening to robert smith going on about the same s*** like he does in "the promise" and "the end of the world" for example, is disgusting. once you are over 40, you shouldn't be creating the same kinds of songs you did when you were a teenager, or in your twenties.     i think billy is hurt, and unsure of himself, and confused about his direction and what he wants to create in his art. the best pumpkins albums, it might be argued, show focus: "siamese dream" and "Adore." hell, even the zero single/ep showed a focus that is a juggernaut for you on your bad days.     i want the smashing pumpkins to exist as badly as any other fan who feels their lack in this world. and i do believe in billy. everybody writes some bad stuff and makes missteps. but when something is pronounced dead, it shouldn't come back. take a look at any horror story for this theme. as is said in "pet sematary," "Sometimes, dead is better."

I Written by Guest on 2006-10-16 21:05:49 Believe in Jimmy and Billy.

Written by Guest on 2006-10-17 11:40:18 I totally agree with the "hope for a zombie" post. The Smashing Pumpkins are not Billy and Jimmy alone; they are The Smashing Pumpkins: that right group of people at that right period of time. That group of people had a chemestry among them -- a "je ne sais quoi". The technical skills of the musicians are important, but are only part of the whole equation. There's more -- so much more -- to a rock band.

ehhh... Written by Guest on 2007-02-22 15:20:51 believe it or not...the most powerful aspect of the pumpkins was not their indivual contributions to the music. in my opinion it was the four either recording, on stage, photo shoot, whatever. There was a chemistry that Billy lost when Jimmy first was let go. Each of their contributions are unknown to anyone who wasn't there- where you there? When D'arcy left- I was like "ummm". To be honest with you I had lost a lot of faith in where I thought the music could go. On Machina- I forced myself to listen to it. Now question my "pumpkiness" all you want. Machina sounded forced- It was a manufactured sound of what Billy wanted others to think of him or what he could do. Billy created this fake future of sound with this grand scheme of almost empty music that he alawys claimed to hate. I stood in line at Tower Records for eight hours one day just to meet them during this time. Trust me I'm a fan. I flew to Chicago (first time on a plane) to see this band. Machina 2 was another disappointment- but I could at least put it on repeat or shuffle. I dont even want to discuss Zwan or his solo albums, both of which I bought and went to the tours. Lets just say as fans I feel we are owed nothing less of the Smashing Pumpkins- Billy, James, D'arcy, and Jimmy. I want to see them playing on the f***ing streets rocking there hearts out and me singing right along with everyone in the crowd. Make it happen guys! Thanks!

you're all wrong Written by Guest on 2006-10-17 11:58:09 Smashing Pumpkins is only Smashing Pumpkins when all four ORIGINAL members are involved. What would Wham! be without Andrew Ridgeley? Sure George Michael was the heart & soul of the band, but he doesn't play solo and say it's a Wham! reunion.

REJOICE IN NEW PUMPKINS! Written by Guest on 2006-10-17 12:48:03 Well, if you look at it from Billy's point of view and in his own words He is smashing pumpkins; but as egocentric as he is I don't think it's a fair claim. I think if there is any kind of Smashing Pumpkins collaboration, under the former name, It is the SPs!  The Band has seen a lot of line up changes and variations in music and genre spans. The Pumpkins constantly evolved from gish all the way to machina. This is the same explanation for my disbelief when they denounced the SPs back 3 years ago. It was impossible for the pumpkins to go back to the days of gish, but I believe the pumpkins will contine to evolve and arguge in the violent fasion that these great artists are accustom to. Frankly it produces great music.  They will be back whatever, no matter what shape the band takes.    p.s. what's with the bloke above? I thought this was about the pumpkins not wham?

Catherine Written by Guest on 2006-10-17 13:08:50 I agree with that other guy who said you're all wrong. The Smashing Pumpkins WILL only be the Smashing Pumpkins with all 4 original members reunited. If not, it's just another failed attempt to resurrect them such as the Zwan fiasco. Bring back all 4 members are stop teasing us, Billy Corgan.

to the sock puppet Written by Guest on 2006-10-18 14:23:27 to the guy who posted 3 times in a row pretending to be differant people, grow up. you don't know anything about the pumpkins, you called yourself "a real fan" and then said that they OWE you what you demand? go **** yourself kid, nobody owes you anything. especially not some guy you saw on tv and built up a pretend relationship with in your head.

About the whole Zwan thing Written by Guest on 2006-10-21 20:18:03 I'm gonna keep this short, but I've noticed a few people on the comment board saying that Zwan was a failed resurrection of the Pumpkins - I can't agree. First off, it wasn't really supposed to be a resurrection, it was supposed to be a rebirth. The reason it failed is because Jimmy and Billy can't hold the band on their own - the other guys (abd girl) in the band didn't care like they did, and that is what ended that. The breakup had little to do about the talent of Zwan's members. It had to do with their dedication.

Billy AND Jimmy... Written by Guest on 2007-03-01 13:29:49 Let's be real, people. If Billy decided to try and learn drums, there would be one original member in this reunion. The most egotistical rock star of the 90s (not an easy title to earn) is the Smashing Pumpkins. Fine. Why didn't he just fire Iha in 2000 and go on as the Smahing Pumpkins? Why didn't he just call Zwan the Smashing Pumpkins? Why wasn't his s***ty solo album recorded as the Smashing Pumpkins? It obviously wasn't because he cares about his former guitarist, based on the unprovoked attacks he's waged against him. The bald one has simply lost his touch and wants to return to the days of smiling fans and enormous pay checks.

Written by Guest on 2006-11-01 12:11:29 Billy is the Pumpkins. PERIOD. No one else even matters.

Write Comment
Name:	Guest
Title:
Comment:
Code:*

Powered by AkoComment 2.0!