Entertainment News
The No. 1 Source For Breaking Music, Film, and TV Headlines

Billy Corgan tells Rolling Stone: “I am influential.”

on March 04, 2010, 1:52pm

It’s no secret that Billy Corgan tends to get, let’s call it, “preachy.” He’s not as bad as Kanye West, but he’s not too far off, either. In his recent interview with Rolling Stone, the Smashing Pumpkins president took the opportunity to let loose, digressing on everything from Jessica Simpson to Pitchfork Media, James Iha to career suicide. Needless to say, it’s going to be a pretty interesting read when the new issue hits streets. For now, here are some goodies to get you going… if that makes any sense whatsoever.

“Do I belong in the conversation about the best artists in the world? My answer is yes, I do,” he says. “I’ve been too productive for too long, and despite what anybody wants to strip away from me, I am influential. I am. So all the Pitchforks in the world can try to strip me of every ounce of dignity, but I belong.”

This one’s pretty honest and while many will argue this, you have to think of all the kids who got depressed and decided to hate the world (and sometimes themselves) because of his music. This writer included.

“Rather than break up the band, what I should have done is chuck James [Iha] out,” Corgan says. “I should have just said to Jimmy [Chamberlin], ‘You go to rehab, and we’ll continue, and James, get the fuck out of here.’ Instead, I fell on my sword for James, for what I thought was a friend.”

Well, glad that’s answered. Sheesh.

My goal in life is to love whoever I think is worth loving, and I think if people knew [Jessica Simpson] like I knew her, they would love her like I do. It’s really simple.”

We’re dying to know how Paris Hilton fits into this equation. Anyways, you can’t help but love his brutal honesty, though you also can’t help but wonder if he’s destroying himself, too. Think about it: Who needs to go out and exclaim they’re influential? Can’t he see that himself? What the hell’s the point? It’s not like he wins anyone over with that statement anyways. Also, he continues to be vague about his band members, which is fine if you don’t want to digress on what happened, but shorthand remarks like that only fuel rumors and start fires. Again, what the hell’s this point?

Perhaps we’ll find out in the full interview. In the meantime, here’s a rhetorical question for all of you to think about: Does all this sort of destroy the Pumpkins’ lasting legacy for you? Does a one-man show that continues to march on this way — writing off former members, for one — erode what “was”?

Food for thought.