Today rings a sharp and awkward bell in the face of contemporary popular music. The death knell has fianlly rung for one of the largest British intstituions, Oasis. The news that Noel Gallagher has departed the group has not yet been approached by comment. This sleepy morning has me up particulary early, and the only thing on my mind seems to be the dismantling of this searing and unique rock group.
BUT NOTHING has surprised me. In the slightest. Not even a little bit. Infact, it seems to highlight the fact that no one saw it coming even more. People would NOW say that it had been a long time coming; the rift between siblings growing ever larger, some even suggesting that the newer members (Archer and Bell) and the new identity that has been attached with their particular style has sullied that swaggering, exaggerative balls-to-the-floor 'rocknroll'. But the undeiniable truth is that it has only been apparent over the last week since the band called of a V festival appearance due to illness.
Now, it seems a little bit obvious what REALLY happened, but lets not bother ourselves with that.
What has come out of this, if not lots of different things, is how incredibly redundent NME looks in the face of Noel's departure. If the NME is meant to do one thing and one thing only it is to deliver the news of what is happening in popular music. No one is going to say this hasn't happened, but in the wake of comment taking the place of news as a favourable option to write, I find it hard to believe that in a relatively slow week, most resident bloggers for the NME have been pre-occupied by the twenty best types of way to piss at the Reading and Leeds festivals and how wonderful Alex Turner's hair looks in the new 'Crying Lightning' video. What a crock of shite.
Funnily though, I didn't predict this either. Sure when Liam said he couldn't wait to whack out a new Oasis LP and Noel said he didn't, something didn't seem right. But in truth (a funny thing, really) who the fuck cares? It has been the general popular opinion that in the last 13 years of "Oasis" have achieved nothing but produce a tired formula, half repetetive Beatles-induced sincereness and half Stones-esque pub anthems. Either way, all of it, with very little exception ("Songbird", "Half the World Away", "The Importance of Being Idle"), is completely immeorable and as far as I am concerned, most of it doesn't deserve to be. However it is also the popular consensus that the first two albums have qualified the band to sell-out arena's worldwide since 1994. Not bad going really, but you kind of figured that it would run out sooner or later.
The question NOW is whether or not Oasis would continue. The opinion of this writer seems to be yes, but for not very long. I give it two years, maybe three...but eighteen months (and a new album, or just an EP) seems logical. I have a feeling the group will follow in the paths of their southern counterparts Blur by releasing one great track and one underwhelming album before cutting their losses and/or waiting till the original line-up is reformed (possibly with Bonehead and Guigsy???) and the light is restored. But for now, expect nothing but an endless sea of apathy for a group that has, lets face it, done nothing but do mildly ammusing things to annoy other groups and the press, churn out a couple of sprogs with semi-famous popstars/actresses and back Tony Bliar (no, I didn't spell that wrong). So far I can see this going the way of other mad Mancunian's Morrissey and Ian Brown (I thought of another one, but now I can't remember it) and that Noel will have all the sense his mother gave him and NEVER EVER come back; maybe make a great album of french Jazz or columbian post-rock...who knows, as long as he doesn't pick up with his brother I have no preference.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment