“”
“”
U2, U2, and more U2 – The Edge and the boys seem to be everywhere at the moment. It started with Bono’s appearance at the Labour party conference in the summer and hardly a day has gone by without hearing at least something of the band. This isn’t a complaint – I’m stupidly excited about the new U2 album. I ordered it online and though it still hasn’t arrived as yet, I can’t wait to give it a go. Like most people, in the past I’ve been a big fan, but after a few years my U2 attention span had started to drift. That said I’ve had to backtrack pretty quickly, and give credit where it’s due for their latest efforts.
The brief from Incendiary Top Brass this month was to focus on new bands and this was fully intended, but thinking about the fuss surrounding the new U2 album got me thinking about the only other non-American band that could create such a furore – Oasis.
Effortlessly, they have recently sold out a series of huge venues across the UK for next year. There can be no doubt that in Britain they are right up there with the global big boys – REM, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Radiohead and U2. But unlike all of these other bands, I just don’t feel confident that the new Oasis album can or will offer too many surprises or career reassessing moments.
Let me build the case – the follow up to 2002’s Heathen Chemistry was originally slated for an autumn 2004 release which was then put back, but still on schedule for this year. Then it went to February 2005 – and now the latest story is that it will appear at the end of May – three whole years after the last album. Even the end of May seems to have been a deadline the band has set itself just to stop the whole process going on forever. Putting an album back a month or two fine, but doing it over whole seasons never tends to work. In fact, it usually suggests problems – writing albums doesn’t seem to be like penning a novel or painting masterpieces – when the muse takes hold they tend to flow, just like Oasis’ first two. Weeks not months are usually taken up in the studio by any in-form band.
Mix in a shoddy performance at Glastonbury, things not working out with Death in Vegas (producers with potential to make a very different sound), scrapping the whole album so far and going back to the drawing board this summer, stories of Liam drinking again, and it doesn’t look too rosy. The new producer has also worked with The Thrills – great but not really breaking too much new ground.
Now I could be painting an overly gloomy picture. I sincerely hope that as I type Noel is planning an album full of songs which will be remembered as his Pet Sounds. Ten years in Oasis are the biggest Britpop survivors – commercial success has been maintained, although critical success has dwindled steadily over the years. The mantle of most musically innovative has been passed onto peers such as Radiohead, Super Furry Animals, even their sworn enemies, Blur. It is a safe bet that whether or not you like the next album from these bands, it will be packed with ideas, a spirit of adventure and just a plain desire to progress and do something different to before.
This next album will be Oasis’ sixth – putting them in the territory of Rubber Soul, Aftermath for the Stones and Tommy for The Who. For self-confessed Beatles fanatics, they seem to be missing what made the Fab Four so great – the fact that they constantly raised the bar and experimented with lyrics, song structures, instruments, production techniques and even album themes. In retrospect Rubber Soul was a pivotal album – Mop Tops, teen films and albums padded with R&B covers were being left behind as they discovered California, the Byrds, Dylan and grass. The first grown up Beatles album if you will – opening the door for their unparalled late 60s creativity and eclecticism. The Beatles would have sold millions of albums of more of the same, but would that have assured their place in the musical history books?
Six albums in is a place where if a big band has made it that far, they are successful, safely together, everyone knows the drill and should be at the peak of their musical powers – what better time to really show the world what you can do. A time when it is necessary to leave behind the songs that made them famous in the first place, and move on to new territory. Okay, I know bands can make a career of doing the same thing over and over (as long as they do it well) – Teenage Fan Club spring to mind, but a band the size of Oasis? I’d like to think they’ve got more ambition.
Reading an article about U2’s How To Dismantle… brought several things home. The first was that they act as a true democracy which explains why their albums evolve so slowly – every decision is put to a committee vote and all angles are worked through in excruciatingly long meetings before a decision is taken. Secondly for such a huge band there is a sense of humility, a fear of failing and a feeling that they are only as good as their last album. Apparently Adam Clayton and Larry Mullen Jr. felt that 2002’s All That You Can’t Leave Behind was praised only because the public was relieved to see aging rockers not totally embarrassing themselves. They wanted to leave more of an imprint than this.
That was the motivating force behind the new album, to still be considered relevant and worth listening to after all of these years in the fickle world of rock n roll. The same fear seems to terrify both REM and Radiohead – a fear of not showing any signs of progression, which explains their quest to continually take on new influences and re-evaluate the way they work and the records they put out.
This seems to me to be in contrast to Oasis, decisions and song-writing don’t seem to be a democratic process. Noel is portrayed as the dominant force. On a recent radio interview Noel described himself as a “benevolent dictator” in the studio. He was kidding but I wondered how much free rein others in the band are given. Also, arrogance seems a big thing in the Kingdom of Noel – every interview I have ever seen him do revolves around him continually telling the interviewer how brilliant Oasis and their songs are (and, of course, by implication, how brilliant he is). Why not? There is undoubtedly a huge amount to be said for attitude and arrogance when it comes to being a rock star, but I also wonder if it can work the other way and stifle creativity.
During a recent TV documentary around the 10th anniversary of Definitely Maybe, Noel admitted that when they signed to Creation they had around 50 songs. The best were used as early singles, B-sides and then to fill the first two albums. After that the less good ones formed the backbone of Be Here Now (which I still intend to listen to again after a few fat lines – maybe a metallic taste in my nose and mouth will make it sound better or even just understandable…) Presumably this means all of the songs written after 1997, after the hunger of wanting to make it to the top has started to fade, have been new. Mansions not building sites don’t seem to have been such a creative catalyst. It must be the hardest thing for any band – to fight through fame, money and adulation and come out the other side with a creative drive fully in tact.
Just to illustrate the point, compare and contrast Noel et al with two of our brightest new hopes. To my mind, Franz Ferdinand and The Coral could easily produce their next albums to sound broadly the same as their previous ones and, so long as they write a handful of radio friendly singles, maintain their position and sales. But they don’t want to – both bands are said to be experimenting with an eclectic choice of producers for their next projects.
Franz Ferdinand is planning some songs with Dan the Automator producing. Fantastic – the man who produced Dr Octagon and Deltron 3030 getting to grips with FF – now that is something to get excited about. Apparently, they like the fact that he has no respect for genre. The Coral too is rumoured to be working with the guys from Portishead. Ian Broudie would have done again, but they wanted to do it differently.
Whether this is down to “artiness”, musical ability, a willingness to take risks, broad musical influences or just plain chutzpah, I don’t know but compare it with Oasis. Maybe being signed to smaller, genuinely independent labels like Domino and Deltasonic helps, but unlike many less-established major label artists, surely Oasis have enough clout to do pretty much what they like. It would be a brave record label that turns down a new Oasis album, even if it is very different to what has gone before.
So there it is: my heart would love Oasis to write the album that changes the way they are remembered in the future, but my head tells me we should expect more of the same. Of course it will sell bucket-loads regardless, but like their beloved Manchester City are they are now trading on past glories? However, of course nothing is ever as simple as that last sentence. I feel churlish for knocking Oasis – in fact whilst writing this I took a quick break – and put Acquiesce on the CD player. Tooled up with attitude and guitars turned to 12, it just about pinned me against the wall – after all these years. Don’t take my word for it, go and play it – still sounds absolutely amazing. Oasis has earned a place in rock history. They came out of nowhere with their first two outstanding albums and how many bands are there that you can say that about in the past 10 years?
—————————–
Anyway to finish this month here’s a contest: which is the oddest music-related story of recent times? A bookmaker would have given massive odds on the following even happening, let alone within weeks of each other. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you:
A buck-naked Ozzy Osbourne gripping an intruder in a headlock during a burglary. The robber jumped 30 feet out of a window to escape…
Morrissey – a man so cool that he sings about forgiving Jesus in the run up to Christmas as if he is doing the Son of God a favour. (Mind you, The Streets was voted the Coolest Music Artist in a recent survey – followed by Damien Rice and Lenny Kravitz – who writes these things?) But will he still be cool when Morrissey the Musical hits London’s West End? Following the success of musicals based on Queen and ABBA, the Smiths are said to be next in line. With a working title of “Some Girls Are Bigger than Others”, the show will be “tasteful” and won’t follow the format of traditional musicals. Morrissey and musicals – could it be any more camp? Will there be a chorus line of people dressed as farmyard animals to sing “Meat is Murder” or a dance-off with the Rusholme Ruffians taking on all comers before being sent to Strangeways – God I hope so…
1980’s cock rock revivalists, The Darkness, being the subject of heavyweight arts TV programme, The South Bank Show…
The quality newspapers creating a fuss over the NME glamourising drug abuse (doesn’t that go cap in hand with rock n roll?) Apparently Pete Doherty topping the NME’s Cool List for 2004, has been slammed by drugs charities for making hard drugs appear cool to teenagers. Not sure if this is true, did Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, John Lennon and Keith Richards et al inspire a generation of heroin addicts or do people just have more sense? Do people really bypass every other socio-economic factor and become addicts to copy their favourite rock stars? Personally, I’m more bothered about NME using a whole issue to tell us who they think is cool, rather than are they any good. Of course rock stars are cool – that’s kind of the point.
Words: John Cottrill.
—–