Dave Grohl is the Paul McCartney of the 90s - survived the breakup of a band that had massive mainstream success, reinvented himself as a solo artist, now gets to be a lifetime musician with more money than god. I like Nirvana and I like early Foo Fighters, but modern Dave Grohl has been churning out hard-rock oatmeal with copy-paste lyrics since Colour and the Shape.
He's popular among a core group of ageing followers... his die hard fans (and yes, there are a lot of them). But he's not popular in the sense that he's the new "it."
Aging followers are as much followers as young ones. It is not lesser to create for older people and stuff that appeals to them. Just like with art for any other minority.
I didn't say it was lesser. I said it's different than being the new "it." There's "popular" and then there's "society thinks this is the cutting edge of culture - popular." Dave Grohl is the first one.
Not the first. Maybe the first one recently. The old fart from Liverpool and his mates sorta roto-rootered culture and defined “it” for a while. Phil Collins, unfortunately, was the face of pop music in the 80’s. So “average bloke” was a popular look I guess. Chops as a drummer and grew up playing complex music but neither made the big bux. He paid the price for it it seems but survived.