What do you think really defines British pop?

[The Black Shadow]

I wonder what Pieter Spoon would have to say about it?

I couldn't think of anything.

Actually I don't think the 'blurring of genres' argument works quite as well as being posited here. Of course we all know what a Frankenstein creature rock 'n' roll was to start with, and I don't think the mixing and matching ended there.
In the '60s you had the Byrds mixing country with pop and rock, you had Miles Davis adding rockinstruments to jazz,...
In the '70s there was a lot of country-soul being made (as is being rediscovered right now), a lot of the CBGB bands mixed up a lot of different things in their music (just think of the Talking Heads and their world music fixation for a start), then there was the birth of hip-hop which takes the mixing of genres to a whole new level.
Etc. Etc... (No, I'm not running out of examples.)

On the other hand, I don't see what was so genreblurring about Britpop at all. Was there really that much to it besides reviving some glamrock clichés?


When I think of British pop I think of artschool. They either went to it or they sound like they wish they'd gone to it. It's an unfortunate over-intelluctualising of what works best when it remains in the unconscious. It's about looking popmusic over and deciding that it's not enough of a good thing, no, it has to be Art as well.

Hey, someone asked for my two cents.

Wow, I actually agree with you.

[Hugo]

I probably overstated the genre-blurring case, but I think the fact remains that in general, British pop has been more indiscriminate in its influences than the American counterpart. You are spot-on about about the art-school influence. It really is amazing how many of the key players went to art school - Lennon, Barrett, Ferry, Bowie etc. I wonder why there isn't an equivalent art school influence in American pop?

[The Black Shadow]

I probably overstated the genre-blurring case, but I think the fact remains that in general, British pop has been more indiscriminate in its influences than the American counterpart. You are spot-on about about the art-school influence. It really is amazing how many of the key players went to art school - Lennon, Barrett, Ferry, Bowie etc. I wonder why there isn't an equivalent art school influence in American pop?

They made a movie about that called Fame, that's why.

[Brother Spoon]

I wonder why there isn't an equivalent art school influence in American pop?

I don't know.
I'm still wondering why there is an art school influence in British pop.

[Hugo]

I wonder why there isn't an equivalent art school influence in American pop?

I don't know.
I'm still wondering why there is an art school influence in British pop.

Unlike you, though, I don't see it as a negative thing (except in the case of britpop). I think the British art school thing might be aspirational - artistically-orientated working-class and lower-middle-class kids looking for a way up and out, in a class-neutral environment they don't feel excluded from.

[Brother Spoon]

Unlike you, though, I don't see it as a negative thing (except in the case of britpop). I think the British art school thing might be aspirational - artistically-orientated working-class and lower-middle-class kids looking for a way up and out, in a class-neutral environment they don't feel excluded from.

I'm happy for them, really, but I rather not listen to the results anymore.

[Brother Spoon]

Unlike you, though, I don't see it as a negative thing (except in the case of britpop). I think the British art school thing might be aspirational - artistically-orientated working-class and lower-middle-class kids looking for a way up and out, in a class-neutral environment they don't feel excluded from.

I'm happy for them, really, but I rather not listen to the results anymore.

You know, Pieter, the thread is about British pop, not BritPop.

It all went wrong when the Beatles broke up.

[Penk!]

When I think of British pop I think of artschool. They either went to it or they sound like they wish they'd gone to it. It's an unfortunate over-intelluctualising of what works best when it remains in the unconscious. It's about looking popmusic over and deciding that it's not enough of a good thing, no, it has to be Art as well.

Hey, someone asked for my two cents.

...says the man who thinks sonic youth are better than the JAMC.

He does? Really? And he actually tells people this?

[The Write Profile]

I think the deliberate genre blurring occurs in all great british music, not just the stuff with the guitars. I guess it's the need to be slightly askew in the approach, even if it doesn't always work. It's there in things like Soul II Soul, Coldcut, Massive Attack, Fourtet etc.

Artifice is something I've discussed with Bro. Spoon a bit in pms and I kind of see where he's coming from in the argument about loading too much meaning into pop music--but the best stuff is probably more of a case of 'playing' around with form rather than intellectualising.

For some reason, Edwyn Collins springs to mind, even though he's Scottish. If you take the idea too far, you get into the slightly dangerous terrain of 'pop music about pop music', which almost ironises [sic] it one step too far. So it's a matter of getting the balance right, I suppose.




Strange, I tried to think of an obvious British example, and I come up with a Scot.

[Harry Webster]

I wonder what Pieter Spoon would have to say about it?

I couldn't think of anything.

Actually I don't think the 'blurring of genres' argument works quite as well as being posited here. Of course we all know what a Frankenstein creature rock 'n' roll was to start with, and I don't think the mixing and matching ended there.
In the '60s you had the Byrds mixing country with pop and rock, you had Miles Davis adding rockinstruments to jazz,...
In the '70s there was a lot of country-soul being made (as is being rediscovered right now), a lot of the CBGB bands mixed up a lot of different things in their music (just think of the Talking Heads and their world music fixation for a start), then there was the birth of hip-hop which takes the mixing of genres to a whole new level.
Etc. Etc... (No, I'm not running out of examples.)

On the other hand, I don't see what was so genreblurring about Britpop at all. Was there really that much to it besides reviving some glamrock clichés?


When I think of British pop I think of artschool. They either went to it or they sound like they wish they'd gone to it. It's an unfortunate over-intelluctualising of what works best when it remains in the unconscious. It's about looking popmusic over and deciding that it's not enough of a good thing, no, it has to be Art as well.

Hey, someone asked for my two cents.

"Belgiums In The Congo"!
As you say, we would do well to listen to Billy Joel on such occasions.

[Penk!]

Strange, I tried to think of an obvious British example, and I come up with a Scot.

Well, they are more British I suppose, overseas culture hasn't quite penetrated that far up yet...

[The Write Profile]

yet again, I've thought of an Irishman but...Kevin Rowland and early period Dexy's.

what their first two albums signify for me, is something neverknows touched upon-- a sense of the "can do anything" type-arrogance that's both bold and ludicruous, but in the case of them, they carried it off with such vigour and aplomb that it's almost impossible to ignore. There seems to be a very parocial slant in some of the lyrics as there is a lot of dicussion on "Burn it Down" about what Rowland perceives as racism towards Irish from Brits ("Never heard about Oscar Wilde... etc"), Also there is an acknolwedgement of history ("Geno") but the feeling that he's stripping it down. Maybe that's British or just universal pop arrogance, I don't know.

[Card Cheat]

Thinking about this some more lead me to question where a group like The Pogues fit into this argument. I mean, on one hand, they're far too Irish aren't they to be comsidered British. And yet there's the clear emotional geography of London as well, particularly in a lot of their early work.

I wonder whether someone could help me out here, how British are the Pogues? And if they are, then where does Britishness stop?

[The Modernist]

Thinking about this some more lead me to question where a group like The Pogues fit into this argument. I mean, on one hand, they're far too Irish aren't they to be comsidered British. And yet there's the clear emotional geography of London as well, particularly in a lot of their early work.

I wonder whether someone could help me out here, how British are the Pogues? And if they are, then where does Britishness stop?

I'd call them London -Irish, not British.

[Billybob Dylan]

Thinking about this some more lead me to question where a group like The Pogues fit into this argument. I mean, on one hand, they're far too Irish aren't they to be comsidered British. And yet there's the clear emotional geography of London as well, particularly in a lot of their early work.

I wonder whether someone could help me out here, how British are the Pogues? And if they are, then where does Britishness stop?

The Irish connection is with the Republic though, isn't it? Rather than Ulster. So unless one of them was born before 1922, they couldn't be considered "British."

[Owen]

Thinking about this some more lead me to question where a group like The Pogues fit into this argument. I mean, on one hand, they're far too Irish aren't they to be comsidered British. And yet there's the clear emotional geography of London as well, particularly in a lot of their early work.

I wonder whether someone could help me out here, how British are the Pogues? And if they are, then where does Britishness stop?

The Irish connection is with the Republic though, isn't it? Rather than Ulster. So unless one of them was born before 1922, they couldn't be considered "British."

A couple of the pogues were on the radcliffe show last night talking about how they had about 5 members before anyone with an irish passport joined. Most of them were born in the UK. I think they probably count as one of the great london bands as well as a great irish one.

[copehead]

Thinking about this some more lead me to question where a group like The Pogues fit into this argument. I mean, on one hand, they're far too Irish aren't they to be comsidered British. And yet there's the clear emotional geography of London as well, particularly in a lot of their early work.

I wonder whether someone could help me out here, how British are the Pogues? And if they are, then where does Britishness stop?

The Irish connection is with the Republic though, isn't it? Rather than Ulster. So unless one of them was born before 1922, they couldn't be considered "British."

A couple of the pogues were on the radcliffe show last night talking about how they had about 5 members before anyone with an irish passport joined. Most of them were born in the UK. I think they probably count as one of the great london bands as well as a great irish one.

That's what the song "Transmetropolitan" is all about.

Oh, and to answer the question, it is cross genre experimentalism and being open to different musical styles as someone else pointed out above

[Spandau Billy]

What do I think defines british pop music? One word :

Spandau Ballet.