Bestival 2011

[jump]

Just gonna throw out there as they're already a few rumours for them, No Doubt had said they're gonna make an announcement soon.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

Just gonna throw out there as they're already a few rumours for them, No Doubt had said they're gonna make an announcement soon.

[davidames100]

Incidentally, scrolling down that page I notice something about Jane's Addiction, although I'm pretty sure Rob has ruled them out at some point too. Would be a good band to have at Bestival and very definitely a band that match the criteria.

[Joe-]

I'm not sure if it will be a group or solo, when they first confirmed it the headliner was being referred to as "they". On Facebook Bestival replied to someone saying something along the lines of "We can't announce who it is yet but they're great" Hmm, I kinda hope it wont be Grace Jones it'd be a bit anti-climatic (for me) but I'd go see DJ Shadow and Fatboy Slim anyways.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

I inferred from what Rob said that it would be a solo act. That's if we're taking what he said literally. A band wouldn't be a 'rock star' (singular). But that may be me being pedantic.

[kaosmark2]

Indeed. The critic's choice rather than the most popular. Kate Bush sort of size and reputation.

I still think this criteria we have been given is still quite vague though - it could be anybody.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

Although Jane's Addiction would be amazingly awesome.

[kaosmark2]

Jane's Addiction would be beyond awesome, although talking to a much older fan of theirs I've been assured that they're a band you had to see back in the late 80s or early 90s when they were surfing, heroin addicted vegans to appreciate their value. Nostalgia's a malicious bitch.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

Alas, I was a young fellow then, unaware of them and how awesome they were.

[davidames100]

I mean it's not like when you get a band such as The Beatles who most people listen to now because of the retro-fashion allure rather than because they can identify with their music...The best bands work on the formula that their music doesn't represent a time and a place and Jane's Addiction have that timeless quality in spades.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

I really hope this is just a deliberately 'controversial' comment made purely to wind people up. If not then you've just seriously undermined everything you've ever said on here.

[davidames100]

What would I gain from being 'controversial'? It's not a reactionary opinion. I'm just stating facts. Jane's Addiction are a band that make timeless music - could play it in the 80's and it'd make sense, could play it in the 90's and it'd make sense, could play it in the 00's and it'd make sense, could play it now and it'd make sense. There's nothing controversial about saying that.

If you're referring to my comment about The Beatles then all you have to do is go to a Ben Sherman shop to see how true that is. There you will see The Beatles brand in all its homogenised glory; faces and 'whacky' logos plastered all over the cheaply made t-shirts and yet most people that wear them have never even heard 'Tomorrow Never Knows' - most would listen to the first few seconds and think it's a Chemical Brothers track. Same with The Ramones if you casually wander into any HMV and head towards the t-shirts section.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

I included that comment as it added to the ridiculousness of your comment about The Beatles - JA are timeless and The Beatles aren't?

[edfirth]

I also own a Beatles HMV top, but also own all the Beatles albums and grew up on them. I agree that they're an exception to the retro-rule

[edfirth]

I also own a Beatles HMV top, but also own all the Beatles albums and grew up on them. I agree that they're an exception to the retro-rule

[Dave The Hedgehog]

I think the basic point I'm making is this - if you walked down the street and you were wearing a Jane's Addiction t-shirt, you'd be making a statement about the person you are and your taste in music. If you walk down the street wearing a Beatles t-shirt, you're just another person walking along the street wearing a Beatles t-shirt; there's nothing special about it, you could burn it, piss on it, and then vomit all over it, but if it ever needed replacing you could just nip out to your local HMV and pick up another one like it's a packet of crisps. It's disposable and ultimately meaningless.

Edited June 9, 2011 by Dave The Hedgehog

[Joe-]

I see what you mean Dave, seems to be that kind of fashion. I know places like Topshop sell a lot of these kind of t'shirts like Sex Pistols, Ian Brown, Rolling Stones, etc. If you ask half the people if they've listened to them they'd probably have not, like the chindie chaps in my school. If I saw someone walking around in one of t'shirts like you said- I'd just presume they got it to be ironic or something, whereas if I see a person walking around in a Jane's Addiction t'shirt I'd think "Hey, you actually like music!".

But yeah, I getcha.

Edited June 9, 2011 by Joe-

[edfirth]

I think the basic point I'm making is this - if you walked down the street and you were wearing a Jane's Addiction t-shirt, you'd be making a statement about the person you are and your taste in music. If you walk down the street wearing a Beatles t-shirt, you're just another person walking along the street wearing a Beatles t-shirt; there's nothing special about it, you could burn it, piss on it, and then vomit all over it, but if it ever needed replacing you could just nip out to your local HMV and pick up another one like it's a packet of crisps. It's disposable and ultimately meaningless.

[davidames100]

All of this is completely incidental but could you help me navigate towards the point in my message that directly said 'The Beatles aren't timeless'?

Two key points - 1. You probably won't be able to because I didn't actually say it, and I wouldn't say it because it's not true, and 2. I mentioned The Chemical Brothers and 'Tomorrow Never Knows' as two very specific examples to illustrate the fact that even throughout a genre as polarised to The Beatles as Dance/Rave, their musical influence still transcends genre specification and resounds throughout just about every spectrum of modern music. In 20,000 years time, the lizards will be playing The Beatles and it'll still make sense.

However, I think you've completely missed the point.

Jane's Addiction are an incredibly influential band in their own right but for the time being, their influence, along with so many others (New York Dolls, Suicide, REM, Pixies, etc), is going under the radar of the same people that turned The Beatles and The Ramones into a brand and sold them off to the public as a fashion commodity/necessity - which is good. If I see a person walking down the street - some young kid wearing a Jane's Addiction t-shirt - I know that if I go up to him and have a conversation with him about the band, he'll be able to discuss them with me at length because they're a band that you need to go out of your way to find. Like the other week, I saw somebody walking along the street in Derby (of all places) with a Jesus Lizard t-shirt on, and I had to stop him in the street just to talk about his t-shirt and spent a good half an hour to 45 minutes talking about them and Noise Rock in general.

With The Beatles or The Ramones - AC/DC, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Guns N Roses and all the other Indonesian sweat-rags you'll find - it's a little different because it's hard to tell if that person has just come out of Ben Sherman a fan of The Beatles or has always been a fan of The Beatles but just couldn't bring himself to make the effort to buy something with fewer pop culture attachments. I feel no immediate desire to go up to these people and talk to them about these bands because I've found that when I do, the people generally tend to have very few interesting things to say about music and can't really sustain an objective opinion on why they own and wear something they ultimately feel nothing for. I'm not saying that's you, by the way; I'm saying that's the people I've encountered.

[davidames100]

I see what you mean Dave, seems to be that kind of fashion. I know places like Topshop sell a lot of these kind of t'shirts like Sex Pistols, Ian Brown, Rolling Stones, etc. If you ask half the people if they've listened to them they'd probably have not, like the chindie chaps in my school. If I saw someone walking around in one of t'shirts like you said- I'd just presume they got it to be ironic or something, whereas if I see a person walking around in a Jane's Addiction t'shirt I'd think "Hey, you actually like music!".

But yeah, I getcha.

[edfirth]

When I buy a shirt I think of three things

1) Do I like the band?

2) Is it a nice design?

3) Is this band a guilty pleasure? As in, do I want to be seen in this?

I guess point 3 is the closest I come to wanting to look cool/different/alternative, but usually that's only because I wouldn't want to be associated with fans of that band. I have an MCR shirt which I bought when I was like 16 but never wore out, haha

[Joe-]

When I buy a shirt I think of three things

1) Do I like the band?

2) Is it a nice design?

3) Is this band a guilty pleasure? As in, do I want to be seen in this?

I guess point 3 is the closest I come to wanting to look cool/different/alternative, but usually that's only because I wouldn't want to be associated with fans of that band. I have an MCR shirt which I bought when I was like 16 but never wore out, haha

Edited June 9, 2011 by Joe-

[Dave The Hedgehog]

I see what you mean Dave, seems to be that kind of fashion. I know places like Topshop sell a lot of these kind of t'shirts like Sex Pistols, Ian Brown, Rolling Stones, etc. If you ask half the people if they've listened to them they'd probably have not, like the chindie chaps in my school. If I saw someone walking around in one of t'shirts like you said- I'd just presume they got it to be ironic or something, whereas if I see a person walking around in a Jane's Addiction t'shirt I'd think "Hey, you actually like music!".

But yeah, I getcha.

[Dave The Hedgehog]

You very specifically compared JA and The Beatles (even if only an example of a type). The inference of your article was very much that JA were timeless but groups like The Beatles or Ramones weren't and were only popular now to the 'retro-fashion' brigade. It may not be what you meant but it's very much how it read.

Edited June 9, 2011 by Dave The Hedgehog

[jump]

I personally own about 5 Clash, 1 Motorhead, 1 Madness, 1 Big D & The Kids Table, 1 Streetlight Manifesto, 2 AC/DC & 1 Iron Maiden shirt. All of them I have either bought at their shows or from a market stall and I have all their albums, seen them live ect except for the Iron Maiden one as that was a gift from a girl who bought it from Primark for about £4 and she figured I'd like it because I like band shirts (and I'm not even a Maiden fan) this is also the same person who owns a Rolling Stones, KISS & RUN DMC shirts and she can name about 2 songs from Stones & RUN DMC and her only clue about KISS is she watched a reality show that had Gene Simmons in it and I knew a few others like her too.

Personally I've never met a guy with a band shirt who didn't know the band but I wouldn't be surprised if there was, I have found there's definitely an element of girls who do buy shirts because they look pretty* or saw Jordan/Gwen Stefani/Britney Spears or whoever wear one in the tabloids and thinks it's cool. On a whole I think it's a minority of people who buy band shirts without a clue to who they are.

*This isn't me being sexist just my personal experience

Edited June 9, 2011 by jump