KISS 2023 Goodbye
What happens when an artists' beliefs no longer align with your own?
Good morning!
Today, we have a guest post from Kadrian Alvarenga, author of the First Pressings Substack.
What happens when an artist or band you love expresses a belief you can’t abide by? Is it possible to separate the artist from their work, or is there a line that cannot be crossed—a tipping point that ultimately forces you to stop listening to work you’ve enjoyed for years?
In today's guest post, Kadrian Alvarenga faces the issue head-on. As a long-time fan of KISS, Kadrian was stung by recent comments by some band members, and he had to decide: stay enlisted as a member of the KISS Army, or leave that world behind?
For those of you not familiar with Kadrian’s work, you’re in for a treat. He’s the writer behind First Pressings, a Substack he hopes will “have you walk[ing] away having discovered at least one new piece of music to listen to on a Sunday morning or help build out your collection.”
In other words, he’s one of us.
Note: This piece wrestles with some tough comments, and Alvarenga has included a CW below.
And with that, I’ll get out of the way and let Kadrian take the wheel!
Trigger Warning: this piece mentions anti-trans remarks made by a band member of KISS and discusses other problematic artists.
You wanted the best . . . .
Just as every KISS concert begins with those famous words, so begins the end of my relationship with this band.
On November 4th, 2023, I witnessed the four current members of KISS - Paul Stanley (Starchild), Gene Simmons (the Demon), Tommy Thayer (The Spaceman), & Eric Singer (The Cat) - perform their first(!) show ever at the Hollywood Bowl and their final show ever in Los Angeles.
I know it’s a bit of boy-crying-wolf since KISS have seemingly been on their Farewell Tour for YEARS. After all, I saw them for the first time in 2019 on the End of The World Tour - the same tour they just finished in December 2023. This time, though, the farewell feels real.
It also feels about time.
With 2023 ending this week, I’m in my feelings about a lot of things and was reflecting on the legacy of this Boomer / Gen X band, what their future holds, and my relationship with their music.
There’s no better way to start those musings than going back to the beginning, which for me, started in 2017. Until then, I never really “got” KISS. I had heard the hit songs, watched that film Detroit Rock City, and seen all the marketing merch (and parodies).
But being a KISS fan? It wasn’t in my cards until my former roommate opened my eyes to their live shows on YouTube one Thanksgiving weekend. I’ll be honest - it greatly impacted me for the sheer “rock ‘n roll-ness” of it all:
The performances!
The showmanship!
The pyrotechnics!
I had never seen anything so spectacular. I knew from seeing their performances on YouTube that I had to see them live one day. First, though, I had to start collecting their albums on vinyl.
You got the best . . .
It’s worth noting that KISS are not the greatest musicians. I recall the controversy from their 2014 induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. I won’t use this space to go into all the things that the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has gotten wrong over the years, but let’s be real - they have gotten A LOT wrong, i.e., racism, sexism, ballot fixing, criteria, etc., but I will concur that KISS wouldn’t have been inducted if the criteria were based on talent alone.
For me, KISS and their entire legacy is not just about the music but the full package: the make-up and mythology, the album cover artwork, the marketing and PR stunts, and, of course, the theatricality of the live show. That’s why their best album ever is 1975’s Alive!, a live recording of the KISS concert experience that finally brought them into the mainstream.
“Before Alive!, KISS had some great songs. In fact, all of the blood and fire of Alive! came from songs on the band’s first three albums, KISS, Hotter Than Hell and Dressed to Kill. But when listened to out of the context of the three-dimensional live KISS experience, those albums failed to capture the larger-than-life spirit the band conveyed in concert” Loudwire
It’s a stunner from start to finish, especially when you listen to it on vinyl. The live experience is the full realization of the band at their best, which you can hear perfectly replicated on Alive! and its sequels Alive II, Alive III, and my favorite Symphony: Alive IV.
While Paul Stanley has admitted to taking certain liberties with the live elements, like inputting more audience cheering and pyrotechnic sounds, I don’t think it takes away from enjoying the album. As he states, it enhances it, just like all the theatricality of the live shows.
I also recognize and understand the other side of the argument: that the theatricality distracts from the lackluster music.
In his autobiography Face the Music, Paul Stanley details the band's early days, particularly one consequential show where the drummer at the time yelled out hello and thanks to some friends in the audience during the performance. After the show, Stanley admonished the drummer, saying that they wouldn’t become the biggest band in the world if they acted like they were playing for just friends and family. You gotta fake it ‘til you make it, right? Since their first three albums didn’t catch fire, they had to create an album that captured their fiery performances. Alive! was their second chance at getting it right.
The hottest band on Earth . . .
Right after the release of Alive!, KISS was EVERYWHERE, something Stanley and Simmons personally made sure of through relentless marketing and merchandising. As a marketer, I can say that Simmons and Stanley are some of the best and most shameless marketing directors out there.
Producing a live album to encourage ticket sales to live shows? Genius.
Never being seen without make-up in public to build up their mythological image? Brilliant.
Taking off the make-up as a PR hook to usher them into the 80s? That stunt gave their career a full resurgence and solidified their existence for another twenty years.
In between all that came comic books, movie and TV appearances, toys, lunch boxes, and even a pinball machine!
Such a larger-than-life presence builds a cult following for those seeking something bigger than themselves. The KISS Army is an insane testament to the influence and legacy that this band leaves behind. I’ve been to the Hollywood Bowl over 100 times in my lifespan, and I had never seen the Bowl the way it came alive last November. Fans everywhere donned imitation make-up and pounded beers in the walkway. Colossal statues of the The Demon, The Starchild, The Space Man, and The Cat flanked either side of the iconic Hollywood Bowl arch.
KISS?
This past May, frontman Paul Stanley decided that his voice needed to be heard on the subject of Transgender healthcare. What he posted was misguided, uninformed, and flat-out anti-trans. A few days later, he came out with an “explanation” post (no apology) stating that “while his thoughts were clear, his words clearly were not,” and he hadn’t been able to articulate what he was trying to say fully. He left it at that. The most glaring aspect of his unnecessary opinion? The total hypocrisy of his words because it came from him.
To be clear, this is the guy who co-founded a band that is most famous for performing in over-the-top black-and-white face makeup, long wigs, and studded leather ensembles. One might even say they dress in a rather drag-like manner.
It’s hard for me, in good conscience, to support any artist who has disparaged or harmed minority groups in any way. Words have power, and what Stanley said was dangerous and wrong.
This leads to one of the most recent questions debated in the wake of #MeToo: how do we reconcile the music we love with the problematic people that our favorite artists actually are? Do we choose the performance over reality?
This latter question is especially ironic given that it’s been KISS’ entire thesis. There are artists I don’t support anymore because of the intentional harm and purposeful malice they have put into the world, specifically R. Kelly, Chris Brown, Michael Jackson, and Kanye West. Yet, there are other artists whom I have struggled to reconcile and reckon with, like David Bowie, John Lennon, Red Hot Chili Peppers, and even my childhood favorite band of all-time, Weezer.
To be clear, Stanley’s comments were made on his personal Instagram and did not come from the full band. However, it has permanently stained my perception and experience of the band and their music. Author Claire Dederer wrote a book entitled Monsters: A Fan’s Dilemma in which she discusses and debates the core emotional problem fans have in instances like this:
These artists did or said something awful and had made something great. The awful thing disrupts the great work; we can’t watch, listen to, or read the great work without remembering the awful thing. Flooded with knowledge of the maker’s monstrousness, we turn away, overcome by disgust. Or … we don’t. We continue watching, separating or trying to separate the artist from the art.
Her excerpt continues to detail the idea of the “stain,” something that tarnishes, seeps in, languishes, and remains on us in relation to an artist. Some stains are so monstrous that it makes dismissing an artist like Michael Jackson easier. However, Dederer is not representative of all people. I know some people who still hold the King of Pop in high esteem because of his forward-thinking music or breaking of barriers for Black artists.
Like many relationships we have with other artists, there is complexity, nuance, and reckoning - with them and ourselves. Ultimately, I believe it is imperative to constantly question, investigate, and re-evaluate relationships with artists, especially in light of news. How you then move forward with your relationship with an artist is your prerogative. This is where I currently sit in my relationship with KISS: questioning, investigating, re-evaluating, and yes, even struggling to separate the art from the artist and discerning if that’s even the right option.
A new era begins . . .
I’d be remiss not to mention that loving KISS has brought me so much joy and played a big role in my life's most recent formative period. That’s why I continue to feel complex emotions about the decision I made to attend the farewell LA show.
Knowing full well that this was also the last time I would see them live again, it felt like the right time to say goodbye to this nearly 50-year-old band that has brought me joy.
Knowing full well that Stanley had made a disparaging remark about a community under attack makes me feel guilty for having gone.
Of course, being the ultimate marketing machine that they are, KISS announced that they had created digital avatars of themselves akin to those ABBA holograms so that they could perform on tour fooooorrrrreeeeevvvverrrr. It’s actually a brilliant idea and makes sense coming from a band that has sold its image for profit for decades now. But maybe it’s also time that KISS says goodbye and gives space to other artists and fans to be better than them, musically and morally.
In the announcement video above, Stanley states that the band KISS is bigger than them as individuals, and it’s owned by the fans. If this idea is to be true, then as fans, while we do the important work of investigating and re-evaluating our relationships with artists who say and do problematic things, we can also call out our musical heroes when we have to and hold them accountable. In these moments, too, we should hold ourselves accountable and call each other out to do better than our idols.
I am doing this with myself and will continue to do so.
In my new era with KISS, whether it’s in relation to them or not, I, as a fan, am calling them out: don’t be anti-trans, and don’t be an asshole. It’s tarnished your legacy, KISS.
We deserve the best and expect the best from “the hottest band on Earth.”
What are your thoughts on supporting problematic artists? Is there a line for you that’s a step too far? Have you stopped supporting a musician or band because of their statements or actions?
Thanks to Kadrian for sharing this essay with us, and thank you for being here,
Kevin—
P.S. Deadline extended: Don’t forget to vote in our Reader’s Choice Poll!
 | A guest post by
|
I hadn’t heard about Stanley’s comments, which are unfortunate and ignorant at minimum. But you don’t even mention Gene Simmons’ decades-long misogyny and sexual harassment, which I find more problematic than Stanley’s recent comments. I know you can’t cover everything, but that feels like a huge omission.
I love KISS, but much of my enjoyment of them — and I've been a fan since the late '70s — derives from the knowledge (and acceptance) of how completely full of shit Gene and Paul are on so many levels. They're great performers, for sure, but I take it with a big grain of salt (and a bigger eye roll) every time they say they're doing something "for the fans," because profit is always the primary motivator. So while I didn't agree with Paul's garbled and ill-informed transgender comments, they also didn't alter my opinion of him or my enjoyment of the band in any way. If those down-punching comments had come from a musician I admired who'd actually spent his career championing the underdog and standing for meaningful things, like Joe Strummer or Billy Bragg, that would be a much different story.