glast0gal

Agree with this - if you keep on adding dance areas, you will attract a crowd who increasingly want to spend time in those areas. Once of the variety of the festival has gone, might as well throw the towel in on the whole thing.

I thought this was a fantastically well-written article and really enjoyed reading it. I think the festival is good at evolving and responding to demand - as is pointed out in the argument the development of the Woodsies area and the re-shaping of Silver Hayes have been two recent successes. Agree that not all options need to be dance orientated though. Get more acts on in the bars late at night, maybe? I bet a lot of people are ending up at these venues because it’s the only thing still going.

My thoughts exactly. It was a big, big ask and I think both sides obviously wanted it to go well but that was a reality that could have been realised a few years down the line, maybe. Agree that it’s a tale as old as time that some vultures just wait in the sidelines waiting for a misstep before releasing their unhinged and offensive remarks, which they try and wrap up as a critique. Sad to see. Hilariously, a lot of people on Facebook (I know, I know) groups probably have never been to the festival. My fault for being wound up by trolls but it doesn’t stop the fact that some, very real people hold these very real opinions and they’re just as upsetting to read whether they’re trolling or not.

This is a really fair and decent assessment of the situation and I agree that Glasto should continue to make bookings like this, as it’s important for the future/pipeline of the festival. On a separate note, I think there have been a few dogwhistle comments on the internet, which have been very disappointing to read. For example, people saying that she’s crap or sh*t but they haven’t listened to her music!? How was you be able to make that assessment if you haven’t listened to her tracks? Saying you don’t like a genre because of elements such as the tempo or construction of the music itself is one thing but discounting an entire artist without listening to them isn’t just stupid, it’s also incredibly telling.

Therein lies the ultimate gamble - had a band met their ceiling, will they grow to be a huge band/artist, do you bump them up to headliner? Ultimately, Emily has the highest level of influence over who headlines so it’s her calling the shots on this. Can’t blame her for sniffing around for the best offer, although I think it’s becoming a more high risk, high reward strategy.

Yeah I feel like they’ll try and fudge one more year before the fallow and then the line ups might start to look different after that break. A lot of emphasis is put on Glastonbury’s headliners (more so by the media and people who want tickets), when arguably their modern selling point is the breadth of what is on offer.

Agree agree agree. I think the festival sometimes forget that they are in a position with a lot of leverage around the comms and framing of the festival. I know they like to create the DIY/back of a fag packet veneer where it’s almost like a patchwork wilt coming together HOWEVER they have a huge platform to tell people what’s up and get people ready for who’s performing. Think Friday headliner needs to be for the new blood - a band getting that leg up into the prime spot. I think they’re going to make Fred Again a Pyramid headliner next year just off of the hype that he’s had. But then…but then…what if there isn’t an act after the fallow that can fall into a headline spot because they don’t have as much hype/following? This goes back to your excellent point of the fact that the festival should have started sowing the seeds for this years back.

You make a good point where maybe the legends slot needs to pivot to more 90s/00s nostalgia? Acts that would have headlined back in the day but wouldn’t make the top of the Pyramid bill now. I suppose your Stereophonics kind of acts or I think someone with a bit more exclusivity.

I think you’re right! I wouldn’t mind - I’m just happy to be there whenever I get the chance to go😁 but I think there’s people whose expectations need to be lowered (without that sounding like a bad thing - just that we can’t expect to have bands as they were at their height 20 plus years after that point).

Avril would have been immensely fun and probably could have pulled it off but I think my gripe is more that the pipeline of the kind of God tier awesome headline acts has run dry, so where does that leave the festival for future events?

This point needs to be repeated more often. Some acts would draw a crowd but aren’t worthy of a headliner spot. There are many different ‘ingredients’ that go into a good headliner and pulling a crowd is just one consideration, normally influenced by bigger factors such as an artist’s credibility and talent.

Really good point - this is where you need a proper, killer clash to balance out the crowds. I think this has been a particular struggle post Covid for the festival? The line up for both stages hasn’t been stacked completely across all three days. It’s been strong in patches but not a brilliant read across.

Yeah I definitely agree with you here. Lizzo in 2019 is a great example. I think you’ve really hit the nail on the head with the fomo element of it. I think there are a lot of clout chasers who attend who want to tick off every possible ‘Glastonbury moment’ and I think it just feels a bit forced. The magic of those moments comes from being in the right place at the right time, rather than something that’s a bit over engineered. Don’t really know how you resolve or undo that because that’s more of a social/attitude thing than anything else? Most bookings I would say are on the right stage at the right time. Think of the sets that have been sensational not only this year but in previous years as well! I think if anything, Glastonbury underestimates how popular pop music has become again. If they book Charli XCX for next year I think she could easily pull off a late afternoon Pyramid set.

This is a really fair point and one I made to my other half this weekend. I feel like there’s a bit of an ego issue (perhaps not the right label for what I’m describing) but where they want to have acts on smaller stages that could definitely (and probably should) play bigger stages, considering the crowds that they are likely to attract. If they’re going for the ‘oh look, we’re that big that we can put a massive 00s pop star on our second stage’ but it then results in chaos then that’s just silly. You’ll still have variety at the festival if you put acts on the stages they (logistically) need to play on. But I just feel like it’s a bit of a power play of sorts to put these huge names on small stages and kind of not expect chaos to unfold because people will actually want to go and watch some Tibetan throat singing on west holts instead?

I watched some of SZA’s set on Sunday with my boyfriend (at home, on the telly). Some thoughts: - Giving her the Sunday slot was a hard ask. Should have been SZA on the Friday, Dua on the Saturday and Coldplay on the Sunday. Think Friday would have worked best for SZA as most Glasto newbies want to see a headline Pyramid set and Friday is obviously their first chance to do just that. Sets the tone for the festival and up against Idles and the other Friday headliners, there would have been lots of choice and I think she would have attracted a larger crowd than she did with her Sunday slot. - Should Emily have been more open about the fact that they tried to get someone bigger (I.e. Madge and Stevie if the rumours are to be believed?) and these options fell through? I know it’s not nice to refer to a headliner as a back up option but it humanises the organisation/operations side of the festival a bit more and might endear people to giving a new headliner a chance. It’s a sheer numbers game that the festival will have years that are just…okay? Not every year can be off the charts with headliners. Think European festivals across the board were pretty meh. - They messed up with the billing and understanding who will be popular, which is hard to do. It’s hard to understand who will be a success and who won’t be and I suppose streams are a part of that to an extent but there are some acts who should have been put on a bigger stage - see: Sugababes and Avril. After Shania, there was a huge shift to Other for Avril and that was it then. Not enough of a draw back to Pyramid for people to stick around. Someone online said that SZA was a real ‘tastemaker’ booking and I agree - someone who would be good to see and adds to the variety of talent on show over the weekend. I fear that the average Glasto goer doesn’t really want to think that hard on a Sunday - people just want sing a long anthems and that’s why Coldplay should have been the Sunday act. I always think the formula for a Pyramid booking is that they should be a household name, with commercial success and BANGERS in their back catalogue. - Acts like this either require Glasto goers to be more open minded or proper fans of artists having a chance to attend. I think the saddest thing was thinking that this was sold to SZA as her chance to shine and play to a huge crowd and it was hardly a Florence and the Machine stepping up to headline moment. Her staging looked stunning but she was messed about with her microphone not being right at the start and a crowd who, although on the surface seemed to be enjoying it, weren’t really her most hardcore fans. That’s such a shame, she deserved more, and I fear that could really hurt her relationship with the festival. She might be a one and done act booking-wise for the fest considering it fell so flat. That’s not really a risk they can afford to take these days as I think they need a bank of reliable talent they can bank on to appear for years to come. - People going home early is quite sad to see (albeit understandable). Part of Glastonbury for me is being challenged, seeing the things you could have your mind changed on. People could have discovered an artist they may have grown to love, alas no. Goes back to the open minded thing. Tough ask on a Sunday but appreciate different people take a different approach.