pulp

[BlackHole2006]

This is almost as good as the Take That thread!

[Bort]

Pulp headlined twice and is considered to be one of the greatest moments in the festival's history. Unless those unlikely rumors of prince or radiohead turn out to be true, they will headline. If someone else is booked as a headliner over them, it would be an insult and a waste of a pulp booking.

Glasto isn't like other festivals that need to throw the biggest, most commercial acts they can find at the top of the bill to sell enough tickets to stay alive. What if someone is too young to remember pulp and too much of a musical ignoramus to take advantage of the internet to know them and gets butthurt over them headlining? They can just not buy a ticket and let the festival flop...oh wait, it's sold out already.

[4AssedMonkey]

I think there's some truth to both sides of the argument here. Pulp were never the most mainstream, successful band in the world, but they did have 3 big albums that charted well and a few singles that were also on radio playlists and charted well. They did however have a huge swell of devoted support all the way through their career. They have a good, long back catalogue and are ore than capable of putting together a cracking setlist.

So, no, they aren't the biggest band ever and didn't have huge commercial success. But yes, they are good enough and popular enough to headline.

Personally, I think an Other stage headline slot would suit best.

[Bort]

Plus, bands of significant renown get a big popularity boost when they reunite. Pavement, Pixies, My Bloody Valentine, etc were all filling large venues and getting prime festival slots that they never pulled off before their split.

[rexclark]

Jeeso there's some ammount of pish getting spouted in this thread. I find it funny that people use record sales to suit their arguement when it suits them. Pulp definately don't have as many hits as Blur or Oasis but when you talk of the biggest British bands of the 90s Pulp would sit just below the big two. Anyone talks of Britpop they'll mention Oasis, Blur and Pulp. Now if Pulp don't have as many "big" hits then why are they so highly regarded? I believe a huge ammount of this is to do with Jarvis Cocker. He was the posterboy of Britpop and even with age is still a hugely popular icon of British culture.

IMO Pulp probably wouldn't headline any of the other big fests but Glastonbury is different, they don't always just pick the big name acts but pick the acts that could create iconic moments at the fest and Pulp have already easily proven that.

[strummer77]

Those saying they have no hits and those claiming they are massive are probably both wrong. The truth lies somewhere in the middle.

[Mardy]

Plus, bands of significant renown get a big popularity boost when they reunite. Pavement, Pixies, My Bloody Valentine, etc were all filling large venues and getting prime festival slots that they never pulled off before their split.

[Guest blackcockerel]

All I'm saying is they could headline and deserve to in my eyes. Yes I'm biased as I'm a huge fan, but some of the reasons given from the no camp are laughable!

[ampersand]

Those saying they have no hits and those claiming they are massive are probably both wrong. The truth lies somewhere in the middle.

[adamski]

I can see both angles of this.

I think they could definitely headline (they have before), and they're definitely bigger than some headliners in the past (skunk anansie...).

However, I could also definitely see them NOT headlining and playing second (or headline the other stage), as there are a fair amount of bands that would definitely headline if they were playing (coldplay, radiohead, rolling stones, prince to name a few).

It also depends on how many headliners were booked before pulp became available (although I'd presume they became available a while before any of us knew about it ).

[Guest blackcockerel]

I can imagine them beIng second to last on the Pyramid or Other Stage headliners but nothing beneath that. They're certainly not going to be playing at time Lightning Seeds played the Pyramid this year!

[ampersand]

I can see both angles of this.

I think they could definitely headline (they have before), and they're definitely bigger than some headliners in the past (skunk anansie...).

However, I could also definitely see them NOT headlining and playing second (or headline the other stage), as there are a fair amount of bands that would definitely headline if they were playing (coldplay, radiohead, rolling stones, prince to name a few).

It also depends on how many headliners were booked before pulp became available (although I'd presume they became available a while before any of us knew about it ).

[Bort]

I know radiohead isn't happening since they aren't planning any gigs until they finish the new album, and prince and the stones seem too unlikely. Radiohead and pulp at the same glasto would be epic, though.

[MEGABOWL]

Wow, this thread got weird didn't it?

I hope they play, for a bit of nostalgia, but if they're headlining there's far more chance I'd find something a bit more exciting. The Specials worked great 2nd top and I think Pulp would too, though given their history with Glastonbury it'd be an easy one for GFL to have headlining

[sifi]

If the verve can headline, and idi two years ago, then Pulp can no question.

[Festival Liam]

I thinkt with Pulp, it will more come down to if the organisers need Pulp to headline. If talks fall through the The Rolling Stones/Radiohead/Gaga/Prince .. whoever they have lined up to play, I can see Pulp easily headlining. I would imagine right now they are penciled in and they know where they stand.

If some of the commercially/currently bigger names pull through then Pulp will probably headling the Other stage. If they pull out Pulp will headline the main stage and most people will be happy with that, I suspect.

[amfy]

Blimey Liam! You won't get far round here with that reasonable attitude!

[paolo1980]

If the verve can headline, and idi two years ago, then Pulp can no question.

[Porcelina]

As someone who could've only dreamed of pubic hair as Britpop was coming to a close, I've always considered The Verve to be bigger than Pulp. They may not have been bigger at the time but UR seemed to have far greater longetivity than anything Pulp put out. If you go and play a random 18-21 year old who's not huge on music Bittersweet, Drugs Don't Work and Lucky Man then I'd say it's far more likely they'll know all three songs over Common People, Disco 2000 and First Time. That's just how I've called it growing up in the hangover.

Also, I thought Coldplay were meant to be the "If we can't get the Stones to do it" insurance policy? The Sunday seems completely open, though I hope that's for Prince.

[Kowalski]

I don't think they should headline the main stage. Second or third last on, or headlining Other Stage would seem most appropriate.

[saratink]

I don't care if they headline main stage, i'll just go see something else.

[VCK]

Pulp definately don't have as many hits as Blur or Oasis but when you talk of the biggest British bands of the 90s Pulp would sit just below the big two.

[sifi]

I wouldn't say MSPs nor Radiohead were part of the Brit Pop movement.

[rexclark]

I'd say Radiohead and the Manics are next down from Blur and Oasis.

Edited December 30, 2010 by rexclark

[Guest blackcockerel]

Manics headlining in 99 - so bad I fell asleep