It almost doesn't matter if Sleater-Kinney were any good. No one owns their albums. No one bought their stuff when they were making records, save a handful of people with good taste. Everyone was buying the White Stripes and Nickelback records during that period. And maybe it wasn't about sales. But when someone writes this about your band:
Sleater-Kinney was almost certainly the most acclaimed American rock band of its time—Wilco is the only group that even comes close—and the question of why they never achieved broader success is an important and unpleasant one, particularly in a rock landscape that still treats female musicians primarily as texts to be read, suspiciously and never carefully.
Then you know something is wrong. Being acclaimed--or, in the vernacular, liked by rock critics only--is a meaningless distinction at a time when actual rock criticism has been dead for decades and is now practiced by clowns.
And I think what really bothers me about this article is that it does not acknowledge nor does it admit that there even is a Kristin Hersh in this world who did everything Sleater-Kinney did but, better, faster, longer and for more people without having to compromise.
They were called Throwing Muses, by the way. How can you write an article about Sleater-Kinney and not mention them?