Siouxsie and the Banshees Reissues

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

Pop is disposable. There is nothing in it's combination of notes and noise that gives any particular example of it such substance that it deserves to trouble our conscience for any length of time.

But yet, thousands of pop songs have lasted many years, some for decades, and have special meaning to millions of people all around the world.

There's an affa lot of bollocks being posted in this thread, business as usual.

[NARC]

Good night last night Oliver? I wasn't sleeping, dinna worry...

*off topic*

[Ollie]

Good night last night Oliver? I wasn't sleeping' date=' dinna worry...

*off topic*[/quote']

christ i totally forgot about that, what in christ did i say? dave was getting me drunk.

[NARC]

Dave...was getting you drunk? Uh-oh, Ollie, do you realise you've just been date raped?

Nothing, you kept apologising for waking me up, despite me saying several times that I wasn't even in bed.

[Steve Temple]

But yet' date=' thousands of pop songs have lasted many years, some for decades, and have special meaning to millions of people all around the world.

There's an affa lot of bollocks being posted in this thread, business as usual.[/quote']

That's because they have been revisted by old people. I'm talking about what young people listen to. Particular pop songs will always be special for particular individuals. Rather than "our conscience" I should have said "the collective conscience of the youth of the western world" :]

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

That's because they have been revisted by old people. I'm talking about what young people listen to. Particular pop songs will always be special for particular individuals. Rather than "our conscience" I should have said "the collective conscience of the youth of the western world" :]

A whole lot of young people listen to, and love, old pop music.

Those goal posts keep getting moved.

[Steve Temple]

A whole lot of young people listen to' date=' and love, old pop music.[/quote']

I know, over several pages I've argued that they shouldn't. I only want what's best for them

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

I know' date=' over several pages I've argued that they shouldn't. I only want what's best for them[/quote']

The fact that they are, disproves your theory that pop isn't worth very much. In a nutshell, pop music means a whole lot to, erm, a whole lot of people.

You aspire to be a musical dictator?

[french_disko]

But yet' date=' thousands of pop songs have lasted many years, some for decades, and have special meaning to millions of people all around the world.

There's an affa lot of bollocks being posted in this thread, business as usual.[/quote']

Aye, worst thread for a long time. Some of the half baked theories, revisionist history & "year zero" attitude are quite astounding really.

[french_disko]

That's because they have been revisted by old people. I'm talking about what young people listen to.

Can you please enlighten me as to what constitutes "old" and "young" people?

I'm 32 & went to about 50 gigs last year & buy one or two CDs each week - should I only be going to see bands of a certain age & buying CDs that have been out for more than a certain amount of years?

Am I allowed to listen to new bands????

[Steve Temple]

The fact that they are' date=' disproves your theory that pop isn't worth very much. In a nutshell, pop music means a whole lot to, erm, a whole lot of people.

You aspire to be a musical dictator? [/quote']

I think of myself as a guru. My wisdom will help people better understand the excitement that is to be had when they embrace current pop and fashion, and it will also help perpetuate pop for years to come. It means a whole lot to a lot of people, and it means a whole lot to me too. I don't want to see it harmed by cynics, sceptics, and post-rock fans. But I need a bigger loudspeaker. I need a job at the NME.

[psydoll]

I know' date=' over several pages I've argued that they shouldn't. I only want what's best for them[/quote']

This thread is highly confusing - may I no longer enjoy 'Walking On Sunshine'?

[psydoll]

I need a job at the NME.

NME are probably raving about The Banshees re-issues as we speak though ?(

[french_disko]

I need a job at the NME.

It's funny, I've enjoyed music - and purchased more - since I stopped buying the NME.

[french_disko]

NME are probably raving about The Banshees re-issues as we speak though ?(

Funnily enough.....

http://www.nme.com/news/113146.htm

And an interview with her in this week's issue, no less!

[Steve Temple]

Can you please enlighten me as to what constitutes "old" and "young" people?

I'm 32 & went to about 50 gigs last year & buy one or two CDs each week - should I only be going to see bands of a certain age & buying CDs that have been out for more than a certain amount of years?

Am I allowed to listen to new bands????

I'm glad you ask. You stop being young when you are 30. As you get older you will regress, ie you will gradually rediscover the music of your youth, whereas when you were young you gradually discovered new music. If you are still listening to the music of your youth, it is because you neglected to embrace new music in your late-20s.

It is acceptable for you to listen to new music, but not cool, young pop bands. If they are not offending the bourgeoning bourgeois sensibilities of a 32 year-old, then they are not as perfect as I had thought, or you have resisted bourgeois sensibilities (in which case, well done)

Your diet of post-rock and Sonic Youth is what I'd expect, but you might find some room for a singer-songwriter or two, or some timeless classics from the late-60s

[psydoll]

Funnily enough.....

http://www.nme.com/news/113146.htm

And an interview with her in this week's issue' date=' no less![/quote']

I feel a strange glow inside that's either bad curry or pride.

It's been a while since I had either so we'll go with the second one

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

I'm glad you ask. You stop being young when you are 30. As you get older you will regress' date=' ie you will gradually rediscover the music of your youth, whereas when you were young you gradually discovered new music. If you are still listening to the music of your youth, it is because you neglected to embrace new music in your late-20s.

It is acceptable for you to listen to new music, but not cool, young pop bands. If they are not offending the bourgeoning bourgeois sensibilities of a 32 year-old, then they are not as perfect as I had thought, or you have resisted bourgeois sensibilities (in which case, well done)

Your diet of post-rock and Sonic Youth is what I'd expect, but you might find some room for a singer-songwriter or two, or some timeless classics from the late-60s[/quote']

You'd get a job at NME no problem.

[betamax]

The Banshees became embarrassing long before now

to who exactly?

and when?

despite being massively influential they split when they ran out of new ideas as all good bands should

i dont know if this maybe puts this debate into context, but in an era when chart success was much more difficult, less contrived and almost hype free, the Banshees were regularly assaulting the top 20 for over 2 years with a range of non commercial sounding singles that sounded like the band was perpetually in a state of re-inventing itself > quite a fucking acheivment really that is unlikely to be repeated

and now in an era when fickle hype and a playground fad can chart a band, Interpol et all the other surrogate copy bands struggle to appear in the top 80 singles chart and their albums regularly bomb out of the album chart after only 2 weeks (basically as soon as someone else is on the front cover of the NME and all the lazy spoonfed suckers are lapping that up instead)

im not even a huge Banshees fan, but I know whats the real deal and whats cheap rip off

The Killers (who have popped up in the thread a couple of times) dont fall into the surrogate lazy copy band / business man craze of 2005. They actually have something pretty good going on ala other contempory bands White Stripes, Yeah Yeah Yeahs, KOL etc and might last a good bit longer because of that.

Fuck conveyor belts. Spoonfeeding the dumb sheep.

[betamax]

I'm glad you ask. You stop being young when you are 30. As you get older you will regress' date=' ie you will gradually rediscover the music of your youth, whereas when you were young you gradually discovered new music. If you are still listening to the music of your youth, it is because you neglected to embrace new music in your late-20s.

It is acceptable for you to listen to new music, but not cool, young pop bands. If they are not offending the bourgeoning bourgeois sensibilities of a 32 year-old, then they are not as perfect as I had thought, or you have resisted bourgeois sensibilities (in which case, well done)

Your diet of post-rock and Sonic Youth is what I'd expect, but you might find some room for a singer-songwriter or two, or some timeless classics from the late-60s[/quote']

youve fucking lost it.....

try some drugs

[Me and Parvati]

You stop being young when you are 30.

Well, that's a bugger, better finish that application for the Saga magazine then...

Music is music is what you like. If you think it's pish, it's pish. If I like it, it's not. I think the term normally used here is 'subjective'. We now have over fifty years of 'rock' music to look back on and listen to - and another fifty years of new stuff to look forward to.

Far oot, min.

[Guest lumpo]

I am old.

30 doesn't hurt.

A lot of the Banshees I didn't like. Too theatrical.

"Pop" and "Re - invention" are strange bedfellows: for the puposes of this debate, Bill Drummond and Jimmy Cauty's manual (http://www.klf.de/online/books/bytheklf/manual.htm) sums it (pop) up for me.

I *LOVE* the Phil Spector sound.

But then again, if we wanted formulae, would we not be chemists?

[NARC]

youve fucking lost it.....

try some drugs

I think he already has...mind-altering ones

[Larsen B]

I think he already has...mind-altering ones

Ooh, bit cumbersome.

[delboy]

I'm glad you ask. You stop being young when you are 30. As you get older you will regress' date=' ie you will gradually rediscover the music of your youth, whereas when you were young you gradually discovered new music. If you are still listening to the music of your youth, it is because you neglected to embrace new music in your late-20s.

It is acceptable for you to listen to new music, but not cool, young pop bands. If they are not offending the bourgeoning bourgeois sensibilities of a 32 year-old, then they are not as perfect as I had thought, or you have resisted bourgeois sensibilities (in which case, well done)

Your diet of post-rock and Sonic Youth is what I'd expect, but you might find some room for a singer-songwriter or two, or some timeless classics from the late-60s[/quote']

i must say i've read some crap on this message board over the years, indeed i have been guilty of posting some quite incredible pish meself but pop tart has exceeded the realms of ultimate shiteness in the above statement. the drugs obviously dont work. its that kind of attitude that has led to the current trend of pathetic nostalgia.

quite frankly with todays cut throat marketing practises within the music industry, bands will be lucky to last more than two albums if they have a major deal. i really cannot see a lot of the current crop being talked about in 20 years time.

the banshees were a fantastic band, i loved the latter stuff as well they were always trying to do something new and they were signed to a major throughout their career (although the covers album was a bit pish). i dont think a lot of the current crop like franz ferdinand, bloc party, futureheads, razorlight have much ability to squeeze themselves out of the retro influenced mould they have created around them. the offshoot project the creatures are good as well and of course in siouxsie there is one of the premier female icons of all time.

best debate on here in ages, this place had become very stale recently might start visiting more often again!