Little did Martin Luther suspect that, when he wrote The Ninety-Five Theses in 1517 he'd be setting a trend for has-been and washed up groups from the 1990s to give things another go in the Noughties and 2010s.
Yes, when the musical history of the beginning of the 21st Century comes to be written it will, I suggest, be called the Second Reformation.
This week alone we've had announcements from Steps and The Stone Roses - two stellar groups from opposite ends of the pop rainbow.
The Steps reunion and comeback has been manufactured via a tortuous reality programme on Sky Living.
I really don't understand the point of so-called "reality television programmes, like Steps Reunion when the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Why else would they bother? They all earnt a small fortune - take a look at "H"'s house!
But I guess some of that wealth has dwindled and they think they can get another few big pay days before they, inevitably, split again.
Cynical? Moi?
Why does ANY group reform? Isn't it always about the pay cheque?
Today The Stone Roses, a seminal group from the Madchester movement of the early 90s, has been outlining their plans for two "big events" next summer preceding a world tour. The Stone Roses have always been he darlings of the music press - tantrums were considered all part of "artistic differences" and bad behaviour was because they were temperamental artists.
Only two years ago John Squire, of The Stone Roses even produced an artwork stating, quite categorically, that I have no desire whatsoever to desicrate the grave of the seminal Manchester pop group The Stone Roses. Two years on and there is his in a press conference joining with Ian Brown et al announcing future plans.
Was he lying back in 2009? Is his heart not in it now? What's happened to change his mind so dramatically?
Ironically The Stone Roses have already had an album released called Second Coming , so is this the Third Coming?
Of course, unlike Steps, The Stone Roses are promising new material. Quite how much and whether it is any good has yet to be seen. I'm not convinced that the seminal group will be able to recreate the success of their former incarnation and will end up simply re-working their hits - after all, isn't that what the punters want?
With many reunions/Greatest Hits tours that is all that the fans want. They want one final, or two final, chances to see their idols live, they want one final album with a few new songs. They want to re-live their teenage years.
Some groups, of course, would find a reunion tricky - The Beatles and The Doors clearly have a few insurmountable problems for a proper reunion! Queen have, of course, managed a reunion of sorts despite the loss of their iconic lead singer and 2Pac somehow still churns out songs from beyond the grave - ingenious!
At the same time, it's only a matter of a couple of years before Oasis are back together!
The big reunion, one that might never happen, of course, is ABBA. Wouldn't it be great to have Benny and Bjorn weave their musical magic one more time with Agnetha and Anna-Frid?
Some groups have come back stronger than before. The best recent examples of this have to be Blur whose live performances built on their earlier successes as well as the extra-Blur work of its members, and Take That who have, mostly thanks to the maturing songwriting talents of Gary Barlow and a live show budget that must be the envy of many small nations, come back stronger than their 1990s selves.
But for every Blur, Take That and, yes, even Steps (their latest greatest hits album entered the charts at Number One last Sunday) there are the others who fall by the way side - they saw a nice injection of money into their bank accounts, a pension top-up that just didn't happen.
The Stone Roses and Steps are both reforming for one thing and one thing only - they should just be honest about it, but let's hope that someday soon, the music industry will invest in new talent - because without new talent who will we have to reform in 2030?
No comments:
Post a Comment