Star fuckers.

1 Like

I feel like Britpop was more like a parent scene for a number of subgenres that themselves weren’t exclusive to the parent scene.

1 Like

Lush are an interesting one for this debate. Definitely not britpop at the start but then they changed their sound to fit into the scene which I think then finished them.

Arguably if they kept themselves separate, they might’ve had more longevity. But maybe they sold more records during that brief britpop period than they otherwise would have?

2 Likes

Not really a scene, more a branding exercise, like shoving a union flag on a packet of Cheddar as if people might think Cheddar was some forrin place otherwise

Napalm Death - Britpop

11 Likes

There’s an argument to say that Pulp fit @ma0sm’s thread title perfectly. They were doing nicely in their own way, then they ended up propelled into the national consciousness off the back of Britpop. It seemed to burn them out a bit, and two albums later they called it a day.

4 Likes

I feel like if there’s any unifying feature to Britpop, it was a rejection of American influences. This was pretty much an English phenomenon, the prominent Scottish groups at the time who were maybe associated with the Britpop scene through record labels or peers (thinking Primal Scream, the Jesus and Mary Chain, Teenage Fanclub) were embracing US influence at that time.

While Suede, Blur and Pulp may have an evolution that took in pre/post Britpop, they were in the midst of it writing specifically about English life in a way that makes them very much Britpop groups, if only for a time. Oasis are adjacent to that, but never really made what I’d consider to be Britpop music.

In conclusion, what was the question again?

2 Likes

Plus they had made a load of ££££ and could afford to take time out

I’d say Suede were more a reaction against Manchester and shoegaze than any kind of continuation. I can see why you say they were too early to be pure Britpop, but I reckon without their big brash glammy singles Britpop doesn’t happen.

(someone here did a dissertation on Britpop, didn’t they? Think it was either @dingaling or @pervo. We should get them in to lay down the law. )

1 Like

Boo radleys - shit novelty records designed to be used as music backing features on daytime TV

FTFY
Giant Steps is one of the best albums of the 90’s. Wake up Boo was shit.

6 Likes

Yeah sorry thats what I meant, just the one song

1 Like

Yeah, I didn’t make myself very clear with this bit

I meant that Madchester & shoegaze (and the Stourbridge scene) had petered out but there were all these indie bands doing decent things that were kind of floating around without belonging to a specific scene, which is why the music press were inventing ridiculous things like ‘the sceme that celebrates itself’, ‘the new wave of new wave’ and ‘Romo’

It was bands like blur & Suede & of course Oasis with their mainstream success that meant the journo tag Britpop actually stuck in the mainstream consciousness - rather than it being the other way around, an actual scene that rose to prominence

2 Likes

Bull. Shit.

  • Tune
  • Shit

0 voters

Can you change shit to cynical cash grab that sank the band and that was also shit?
Thanks :smiley:

The name really annoys me, why boo?! Stop being silly!

It was me :kissing_heart: if you can get past how overwritten it is in parts:

‘Britpop’… originated in the patriotic manifesto originally embraced by the bands Suede and Blur in 1992 as a reaction against the pervasive American ‘grunge’ culture, but did not reach mainstream public consciousness until August 1995. The early 1990s are, therefore, crucial to the accumulation of patriotic sentiment that resulted in the construction of an overarching ‘Cool Britannia’ rhetoric.

While ‘Britpop’ has sometimes been used to describe British pop music generally, it will here describe the 1990s rock music scene that, despite its name suggesting a scene encompassing Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish artists, consisted entirely of English bands. The bands who most vociferously endorsed an Anglocentric ethos in the press and their lyrics were Suede, Pulp, and Blur, whose support for the English cause manifested itself in a trilogy of albums from 1993 to 1995 whose lyrics consistently centred on the minutiae and absurdity of English life. However, the most successful of these was Mancunian quintet Oasis, whose 1995 album (What’s The Story) Morning Glory? is, at the time of writing, the fourth biggest-selling British album in UK history (Lane).

The press also participated, courtesy of Select ’s April 1993 edition, entitled ‘Yanks Go Home!’. The cover feature, ‘Who Do You Think You Are Kidding, Mr Cobain?’ (Maconie 60-71), celebrated five up-and-coming English bands – among them, Suede and Pulp.

Although this was perhaps the most brazen support for Britpop, it was not the first instance of Britpop rhetoric going public. Suede’s early career was partly defined by their nationhood in both the media and their own interview answers, although they later distanced themselves from the movement. An early NME review of their live performance described them as being “as English as nine pence and the smell of the leathered back seats of ‘50s Vauxhalls” (Sutherland 15), while singer Brett Anderson not only pre-empted both Select and Blur’s anti-American statements in the press in an NME article in 1992, but also attempted to articulate the national identity that his band sought to represent by embracing a pro-English agenda: “I’m not remotely attracted by New York. I mean, all the streets are laid out in a grid. Doesn’t that say everything? In Britain, it takes this convoluted, arcane knowledge to get from one bus-stop to the next. That claustrophobic, stifled Englishness is conducive to great art.” (Harris 77)

the Britpop ‘agenda’ and the Britpop ‘sound’ are very different but equally necessary when considering what Britpop is. Suede are the patient zero of Britpop

8 Likes
1 Like

Never read the book but it’s a stupid name

2 Likes