Oasis

[Guest]

Again, they split after Knebworth and the public support for their return would be to paraphrase Liam G "fucking biblical".

They ran out of ideas. But for a time (Live Forever to Knebworth) they were at the vanguard of a mass youth movement not seen since (possibly) Hard Day's Night era Beatles.

Is any massive cultural movement of young people not positive? I'd argue until Oasis lost their way nothing negative came from their existance. Other bands shifted out of their way, others were drawn towards them. In the midst of it all as Nal brilliantly reminds us, you had young men singing their hearts out. Thats a good thing.

Edited October 30, 2013 by tonyblair

[CaledonianGonzo]

I wish I could see the positives, but 20 years on their impact can mostly be seen in things like the size of the crowds that Jake Bugg drew to the Pyramid Stage.

*shudders*

[Wooderson]

They helped popularise laddism and material wealth. They were a musical version of Thatcher.. when he (Noel) was ever asked anything about his music, all he ever said was "well I've got more money than you, so I'm better than you" or "I've been to number 10, you haven't". He had nothing to say about anything that was worth listening to. And Liam was worse. You're actually comparing their effect to The Beatles?

[CaledonianGonzo]

Until Robbie Williams came along - which is the kind of the point, I guess. If all The Beatles had achieved was the cultural impact of Beatlemania then I doubt they'd be remembered very fondly. It was what they did afterwards that ensured their longevity, and that's where Oasis come up wanting.

[Wooderson]

Theres no true line of succession between the Beatles and Oasis in any respect - particularly not musically. I'm merely talking about the impact they made culturally.

I don't think Robbie Williams is as good a comparison as The Spice Girls, Cally.

[Guest]

No need to be so churlish Tony. Are you denying their impact?

From their position of cultural dominance in '95/'96 there is no other comparable pop act.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Yup - that impact isn't up for debate at all. It's a matter of history now and all we can do is sort through what it all meant. And in the case of Britpop I definitely feel pretty ambivalent. I enjoyed some of it at the time and was definitely of the right age to see and enjoy gigs by a number of the better exponents. But two decades hence I stuggle to find much to enjoy.

[Wooderson]

You suggested that any mass cultural movement is a good thing. I'm saying I don't think that's the case.

I'm not denying their popularity.

[CaledonianGonzo]

So what positives, in your view, came from the rise (and cultural dominance) of Oasis?

[russycarps]

Yup - that impact isn't up for debate at all. It's a matter of history now and all we can do is sort through what it all meant. And in the case of Britpop I definitely feel pretty ambivalent. I enjoyed some of it at the time and was definitely of the right age to see and enjoy gigs by a number of the better exponents. But two decades hence I stuggle to find much to enjoy.

Edited October 30, 2013 by russycarps

[Guest]

Read what I said please Tony. Young people.

Where there's any mass youth movement I'd argue it is more positive than negative yes.

Of course there are adult movements that we'd disagree with.

Edited October 30, 2013 by tonyblair

[Wooderson]

Not to overwhelm with stats here. But its necessary.

"Morning Glory" spent something incredible like nearly 8 months in the top five of the album charts. More than one in every three teenagers in the country owned a copy. It sold 4.5 million. Nearly 3 million tried to get tickets for Knebworth.

Indie records didnt sell in these numbers. They certainly didnt wanna go to see gigs in fields in these numbers. They bought Queen records. They bought Simply Red records. They bought Abba records. 3 million people wouldnt bother going to see the Pope FFS.

Oasis opened a window onto the indie popmusic world to a vast swathe of a country. What had been niche was now the mainstream. This alone is positive and noteworthy. I don't think Glasto is as popular today without the boom in the mid-1990s on the backs of Oasis. The eyes of the nation were widened by their impact.

I could also speculate on their importance to the Labour victory in 1997 but that would probably bring down Neil's website with hateful comments in my direction.

[Wooderson]

I missed the 'young' word out by mistake

it's the same though. When I was a young teenager, skinheads were a big thing, going around kicking hippies, pakis, people who followed a different football team to 'theirs', anyone they felt like kicking really. It's hard to see what was positive about that movement

[Mardy]

yeah, there's some really good points being made here all round. Excellent stuff.

They're not the inheritors of the Beatles in any meaningful sense, they pioneered nothing, they didn't go on spiritual quests, they didn't revolutionise the way we think about music.

What they did was provide safe, comfortable, unchallenign music that fitted in with exactly what people wanted to hear. They brought an independent sensibility to the charts, they played instruments, playedm backroom pubs, then the Town and Country, then Brixton, then arenaas, whatever. It was the perfect nrrative for people who like narratives to go with their music. They appealled to that part of pop music which is about big singalongs, straightforward hero worship, authenticity and the alpha male up on stage. All the things that rave etc had taken away. For people in their 30s and 40s in the early 90s, who controlled the media, this was a blessed relief, it was something they could understand after the rise of the DJ etc. NME was relevant again, instead of mixmag.

[mcshed]

Depends on what you class as Britpop, I suppose. I like The Boo Radleys, Gorkys, Stereolab and SFA as much (probably more) than the next man, but then they've only really got release dates in common with the likes of Cast, OCS, 90s Weller, Shed 7, Kula Shaker, etc. - and in the case of the latter lot ah'm oot.

Edit: And I guess the key difference is that the former set of groups would have existed in identical form regardless of Oasis's success. Difficult to say the same of Northern Uproar or what have you.

[Guest]

If Oasis never existed, things would be no different today. Apart from a handful of bands who got some inspiration from the fact that you could be successful by writing and performing fairly boring songs (Coldplay, Travis...).

Noel has no vision at all, he has nothing to say, n o t h i n g. All that Jay-Z at Glastonbury crap. He's an artistic vacuum.

[The Nal]

It's the people who are still oasis fans in 2013 who are the ones who should be viewed with suspicion.

Edited October 30, 2013 by The Nal

[Ed209]

If Oasis never existed, things would be no different today. Apart from a handful of bands who got some inspiration from the fact that you could be successful by writing and performing fairly boring songs (Coldplay, Travis...).

Noel has no vision at all, he has nothing to say, n o t h i n g. All that Jay-Z at Glastonbury crap. He's an artistic vacuum.

[Guest]

Total nonsense and an extremely narrow minded view. Just because they didn't effect you doesn't diminish their cultural impact. You can't erase something as massive as Oasis' impact on Britain in the mid nineties and think everything now would be the same. And to follow this post with, "well what would be different?" would be a silly question also, just because things aren't immediately apparent doesn't mean they don't exist.

[russycarps]

Funnily enough, I made an "Oasis mix" CD for the missus last week and dug through a lot of rarer stuff I'd downloaded and acquired through the years. Mainly Noel doing acoustic version of tunes on various radio shows etc. Enjoyed listening to it.

But their main tunes haven't aged well at all. Roll With It is way worse than it was originally. And it was fucking gash back in the the day.

Did find a nice version of Sunday Morning Call from a French radio show which I liked mind you. Didn't like the song originally.

Agree with that yeah. They're mindless tunes really. "You and I are gonna live forever" being his biggest statement!

[Ed209]

what's narrow minded about it? It's what I think. I saw them, twice. I was as aware of them as anyone.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Oddly, I got home last night, switched on radio 6 and Live Forever came on. It still sounded pretty good. But after that, what else is there? Slide Away. Maybe Supersonic or Cigarettes & Alcohol.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Its narrow minded to think erasing events in history has no change to the future. We all are our history. Changing history, changes us. Like it or not, Oasis are an important part of 90s culture of this country

[Guest]

Its narrow minded to think erasing events in history has no change to the future. We all are our history. Changing history, changes us. Like it or not, Oasis are an important part of 90s culture of this country

[Ed209]

For better or worse...