So, what do we think of "Britpop" now?

Backslapping time. Well done us. We are fantastic.

Britpop...was

One of the most vibrant times in British music
5
7%
Responsible for some of the 90s best stuff
14
20%
Mostly a media-beat up, but a few great groups arose out of it
21
30%
A shamelessly derivative cover-up, in which only a couple of acts justified even half their hype
18
26%
A joke, just terrible mostly
7
10%
What's Britpop?
5
7%
 
Total votes: 70

User avatar
The Write Profile
2017 BCB Cup Champ
Posts: 14629
Joined: 15 Sep 2003, 10:55
Location: Today, Tomorrow, Timaru
Contact:

Postby The Write Profile » 07 Dec 2003, 07:56

The Red-Nosed Heifer wrote:Fuck you Sheepy, Electricity was a fucking great single :P Head Music is also a goddamn great piece of disc.

and also Beautiful Ones? Hello? Best fucking Suede single. I'm just playing around with the mock anger, but c'mon Beautiful Ones would almost be the best single to come out of Britpop, let alone Suede.


Beautiful Ones I fell is too much of a retread of their first two albums, if you note I actually said that I liked Electricity. It is a fine single (in fact I put it on my thread of "great opening tracks on mostly mediocre albums")

The Drowners is still the moment which I feel is their best for me, it's about as close as they ever got to bottling their strange kooky chemistry that they possessed. Anderson's vocal sounds so...impassioned, intenese and contained
Obviously that's my opinion.
As for mock anger, meh, it's water off a duck's back, especially for the pasting I got about making a few generalisations on the Chills a couple of days ago :wink:

Btw, I think the Chills are a great, great band, who are still the goods live
It's before my time but I've been told, he never came back from Karangahape Road.

User avatar
Balboa
Posts: 17579
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 13:31

Postby Balboa » 07 Dec 2003, 11:40

Ced wrote:Britpop was a very exciting thing at the time. Oasis was a great band for, maybe, 18 months. That said, the records they released at that time ("Definitely Maybe" and a lot of single B-sides) stood the test of time, IMO. It never was brilliant, but you can still hear that something was happening on these records.




Pretty much sums up my feelings about it all. It was an exciting time (I was 19/20) even if ultimately the music never matched the hype. It probably lasted 12months at most before it rapidly went downhill - but for that short period of time it looked like good things were happening.

User avatar
Shaky Jake
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 07:39
Location: 60deg 12'N, 25deg 2'E

Postby Shaky Jake » 07 Dec 2003, 12:05

Britpop was a musical internet bubble that burst.

Back then you'd have all (well 90% of you) been into Blur, Oasis, Pulp etc. If this forum had existed then, it would have been dominated by discussion of these bands.

Now you want to pretend that you weren't taken in. Now you want to distance yourself from it, to maintain cool points. You weren't taken in, you weren't suckered.

You're all a bunch of sheep.

Baa.

User avatar
Brother Spoon
Billy Crystal
Posts: 9747
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 08:02
Location: at Yankee Stadium

Postby Brother Spoon » 07 Dec 2003, 12:17

Shaky Jake wrote:Now you want to pretend that you weren't taken in. Now you want to distance yourself from it, to maintain cool points. You weren't taken in, you weren't suckered.


Not a chance. I thought it was crap then and I think it's crap now. There were far greater bands around at that time, in the US and in continental Europe and even in the UK, outside of Britpop. Oasis, Suede, etc. they were terrible as far as I'm concerned.

Guest

Postby Guest » 07 Dec 2003, 12:52

Well I liked it for the most part.

Pulp, Radiohead, Supergrass, Oasis.

Derivative maybe, but fun and vital for the times, Yes.

I fell badly in love and Britpop was the soundtrack.

So I blame Love, not Britpop.

User avatar
Brother Spoon
Billy Crystal
Posts: 9747
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 08:02
Location: at Yankee Stadium

Postby Brother Spoon » 07 Dec 2003, 12:55

cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:vital for the times, Yes.


So the British Nation wanted the rest of the world to believe, but the rest of the world was slightly more savy.

EDIT: God, I was being obnoxious here. Don't mind me. :oops:
Last edited by Brother Spoon on 23 Mar 2005, 10:51, edited 2 times in total.

Guest

Postby Guest » 07 Dec 2003, 13:00

brother festoon wrote:
cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:vital for the times, Yes.


So the British Nation wanted the rest of the world to believe, but the rest of the world was slightly smarter.


Well, let's put it this way:

I don't recall too much going on at the time musically that interested me, I was just treading familiar waters, and then Britpop appeared and it went well with what was going on with me at the time. And let's face it, EVERYONE talked about it at the time. Doesn't mean, of course, that it was necessarily any good, but I can think of worse periods in history.

If it was unintelligent or distasteful, at least it got us thinking about What was intelligent and tasteful again.

User avatar
Brother Spoon
Billy Crystal
Posts: 9747
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 08:02
Location: at Yankee Stadium

Postby Brother Spoon » 07 Dec 2003, 13:04

cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:
brother festoon wrote:
cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:vital for the times, Yes.


So the British Nation wanted the rest of the world to believe, but the rest of the world was slightly smarter.


Well, let's put it this way:

I don't recall too much going on at the time musically that interested me, I was just treading familiar waters, and then Britpop appeared and it went well with what was going on with me at the time. And let's face it, EVERYONE talked about it at the time. Doesn't mean, of course, that it was necessarily any good, but I can think of worse periods in history.

If it was unintelligent or distasteful, at least it got us thinking about What was intelligent and tasteful again.


Sure, as long as you replace every "us", "we", and "everyone" with "British press".
Last edited by Brother Spoon on 23 Mar 2005, 10:26, edited 1 time in total.

Guest

Postby Guest » 07 Dec 2003, 13:05

brother festoon wrote:
cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:
brother festoon wrote:
cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:vital for the times, Yes.


So the British Nation wanted the rest of the world to believe, but the rest of the world was slightly smarter.


Well, let's put it this way:

I don't recall too much going on at the time musically that interested me, I was just treading familiar waters, and then Britpop appeared and it went well with what was going on with me at the time. And let's face it, EVERYONE talked about it at the time. Doesn't mean, of course, that it was necessarily any good, but I can think of worse periods in history.

If it was unintelligent or distasteful, at least it got us thinking about What was intelligent and tasteful again.


Sure, as long as you replace every "us", "we", and "everyone" with "British people".


Well, as you seem very insistent about this point, then so be it.

User avatar
Brother Spoon
Billy Crystal
Posts: 9747
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 08:02
Location: at Yankee Stadium

Postby Brother Spoon » 07 Dec 2003, 13:06

cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote: Well, as you seem very insistent about this point, then so be it.


After all, Great Britain takes up only 50% of the earth's dry land.

Beebsy

Postby Beebsy » 07 Dec 2003, 14:07

Am I too late? Am I coming into this thread like a little pub band that finally realized if OCS can do it so can they, only to find that "Britpop" - whatever that was - had been replaced by the next "movement"? Oh well.

Save this thread. In 10 years time, take it out and read it. Come back to this (or whatever site/virtual pub/skin implanted chatroom it has evolved to) and check out what people are saying about "garage" or "new new wave".

It's kinda like the emperor's new clothes. Once we admit to ourselves that "movements" like Britpop or grunge or acid house can really only be appreciated in the context they existed, we all get to talk about the naked king.

Britpop was nothing. A battle for number 1 between Blur and Oasis? Noel Gallagher at Number 10? Kate Moss in a White Stripes video? The anticipation of the new Strokes album (hey! wait! it's exactly the same as the last one!)? Ho-hum...

The fact that a few excellent bands come about at the same time as a media-defined movement is purely coincidental. If they went for it because they saw that even an inarticulate brickie can be famous then so be it.

User avatar
Shaky Jake
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 07:39
Location: 60deg 12'N, 25deg 2'E

Postby Shaky Jake » 07 Dec 2003, 16:22

An excellent post, Mr. Holder.

Personally I loved Britpop. I embraced it.It was a local phenomena, totally of its time. But it was great.

It wasn't stupid or lacking in taste. Some great music sprang from that time. The Verve, The Manics, some Weller.

As has already been mentioned further up the thread, like most stylistic movements it reacted against what had gone before: the dourness of grunge.

When I was a kid in the eighties, we used to laugh at the seventies as the decade that taste forgot. How wrong was that? I got Al Green on the stereo now.

We're always reacting against what went before. Which I suppose is good and healthy.

User avatar
Cédric
Posts: 15040
Joined: 20 Jul 2003, 18:21
Location: Cuba de la Frontera
Contact:

Postby Cédric » 07 Dec 2003, 16:27

Shaky Jake wrote:When I was a kid in the eighties, we used to laugh at the seventies as the decade that taste forgot. How wrong was that? I got Al Green on the stereo now.


I was a kid in the eighties too, but I didn't laugh at the seventies (and even less the sixties)... And I listened to some Al Green and a lot of Motown and Stax at the time... :)


PS : I know that I don't really answer to what you were saying... :)

User avatar
My name is Spaulding
Pancake Expert
Posts: 24074
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: Somewhere else

Postby My name is Spaulding » 07 Dec 2003, 16:51

cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:Derivative maybe.


Definitely.
Walk In My Shadow wrote:If Spaulding buys it, I'll buy it too.

Guest

Postby Guest » 07 Dec 2003, 17:29

Spaulding Dang Dong wrote:
cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:Derivative maybe.


Definitely.


Well excuse my French but what music Isn't derivative, Cap?

User avatar
Balboa
Posts: 17579
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 13:31

Postby Balboa » 07 Dec 2003, 18:43

Well my view is purely a personal one - I'm sure Britpop had little impact worldwide but in the UK it was an exciting time to be young. Sure a lot of the music was dipensible. It just felt fresh at the time - someting to be involved in, something that went mainstream too (front page of the tabloids, Top of the Pops et al). Plus no matter whether you like Oasis or not (I thought they were alright - that first album still sounds pretty good to me), they were important for a couple of years and at least they acted like proper rock stars (drugs, fights, attitude, No. 1 albums) - which was a shot in the arm.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28578
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Postby Matt Wilson » 07 Dec 2003, 21:04

Was hardly aware of it then.

Love it now, but then I loved grunge, too.

User avatar
My name is Spaulding
Pancake Expert
Posts: 24074
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: Somewhere else

Postby My name is Spaulding » 07 Dec 2003, 23:54

cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:
Spaulding Dang Dong wrote:
cheepnizthefuckingsnowman wrote:Derivative maybe.


Definitely.


Well excuse my French but what music Isn't derivative, Cap?


No, don´t get me wrong. Most of the music I love is derivative.
I was only trying (and failing as it seems) to create a pun with your post and one of Britpop´s most lauded albums.
Walk In My Shadow wrote:If Spaulding buys it, I'll buy it too.

User avatar
Shaky Jake
Posts: 86
Joined: 24 Jul 2003, 07:39
Location: 60deg 12'N, 25deg 2'E

Postby Shaky Jake » 08 Dec 2003, 07:21

Ced wrote:I was a kid in the eighties too, but I didn't laugh at the seventies (and even less the sixties)... And I listened to some Al Green and a lot of Motown and Stax at the time... :)


Are you sure you don't have Revisionist Memory Syndrome? :)

e.g.

"Yeah, well of course I was listening to the Velvets in the pram and Funkadelic was never off my stereo around the time I started school."

Although I was quite a cool teenager (he says modestly), my route to Stax was through Phil Collins (I was about 13 and loved Miami Vice and No Jacket Required was the first album I bought), my route to Parliament and Curtis was through Level-42 (my first proper gig: 6.12.86 at Birmingham NEC). Checking out music that was referred to by bands in interviews...

... which has nothing to do with Britpop.

User avatar
Cédric
Posts: 15040
Joined: 20 Jul 2003, 18:21
Location: Cuba de la Frontera
Contact:

Postby Cédric » 08 Dec 2003, 09:09

Shaky Jake wrote:
Ced wrote:I was a kid in the eighties too, but I didn't laugh at the seventies (and even less the sixties)... And I listened to some Al Green and a lot of Motown and Stax at the time... :)


Are you sure you don't have Revisionist Memory Syndrome? :)

e.g.

"Yeah, well of course I was listening to the Velvets in the pram and Funkadelic was never off my stereo around the time I started school."

Although I was quite a cool teenager (he says modestly), my route to Stax was through Phil Collins (I was about 13 and loved Miami Vice and No Jacket Required was the first album I bought), my route to Parliament and Curtis was through Level-42 (my first proper gig: 6.12.86 at Birmingham NEC). Checking out music that was referred to by bands in interviews...

... which has nothing to do with Britpop.


No, I'm serious ! :lol:

Of course, I listened to some shit records at the time, but I also listened to some really cool stuff. For instance, I bought my first Motown comps (Temptations and Four Tops) around 1986. I was fifteen. I had seen a Motown show on TV, etc... Same for Jackie Wilson (it was when some of his hits were re-released in England after the success of "Reet Petite") and Otis Redding around the same time, and I was listening to Sam Cooke and Al Green on a soul comp that I had brought back from England (where I satyed for holidays in the summer). It didn't "protect" me from listening to Guns N' Roses (which I still rate) two years later but, at that time, I was also into Lou Reed, The Velvet, The Byrds, The Band, Dylan and the Creedence (I don't even mention the Beatles and Stones) which were among the first CDs I bought. As a matter of fact, I discovered most of these artists by myself while watching two great TV programs : "25 Years of Rock'n'Roll" (Rolling Stone mag's birthday) and "100 Best Singles Ever" (also made by Rolling Stone). And then, from one great album to the other, I didn't have much time to pay attention to the contemporary records. :)