"World-class thinking about music, business, publishing and the general world of media" - Campaign
chaplin
Monday, June 25, 2007
That Glastonbury report in full
Just been and got the son and heir from the tube station. Looked like he'd been paintballing for a month. Quote: "There were some good bands but if you can't sit down for three days it's not worth it."
Watched a bit on tv and didn't really envy anyone who was there. But why is the BBC coverage so poor?
The great thing about Glastonbury is its diversity and the range of music, etc. on offer. You wouldn't get any idea of this from the BBC coverage, which centred very squarely on white boys with guitars and Amy/Lilly.
At one stage on Saturday I pressed the red button and it was a choice between faceless indie bands such as Klaxons/Guillemots/Pidgeon Detective/Babyshambles/Maximo Park/Dirty Pretty Things/etc.
In the days when Peel was involved in the coverage there did seem to be a bit more of the eclectic Glastonbury on show.
Concur with your son. As a glasto veteran i think this years was one of the poorest for while. It's basically in the wrong place the eavis' are never going to admit this but it's very wet bit of the world and the much vauted drainage works had little effect it was as wet as ever plus as it gets bigger walking from one place to another gets tiresome. Also performances that look good on tv are sometimes poor live and vice versa. The Monkeys we thought didn't cut it as a headliners. Arctic fire were very good as were the earlies, and waterboys. It was good to see madness play a secret gig but the sound was rubbish and the set up dangerous it was lucky no one was injured. On the whole after 20 years of going I would think hard about going again, how do you tell what the weathers going to be like when you have to buy tickets for gigs 6-8 months in advance?
Am I the only person who finds themself thinking how smelly her hair must be when watching Amy Winehouse? I'm sure in real life she's a very hygenic young lady, but watching her warbling away on the telly I found myself distracted by thoughts of shampoo and better fitting clothes.
I know they are the current critics' darlings but I am largely unmoved by Arcade Fire. There may be lot of them hitting/strumming/blowing a lot of different instruments but it just sounds like a shapeless racket to me. Their Glastonbury set (seen on TV only) didn't change my opinion.
Is it wrong for a 36 year-old to think that John Fogerty was one of this year's highlights? I find bands like Editors and Bloc Party to be completely devoid of charisma, stage craft and, most importantly, decent tunes.
Watched a bit on tv and didn't really envy anyone who was there. But why is the BBC coverage so poor?
ReplyDeleteThe great thing about Glastonbury is its diversity and the range of music, etc. on offer. You wouldn't get any idea of this from the BBC coverage, which centred very squarely on white boys with guitars and Amy/Lilly.
At one stage on Saturday I pressed the red button and it was a choice between faceless indie bands such as Klaxons/Guillemots/Pidgeon Detective/Babyshambles/Maximo Park/Dirty Pretty Things/etc.
In the days when Peel was involved in the coverage there did seem to be a bit more of the eclectic Glastonbury on show.
I flicked it on and off all weekend. My policy is simple: if it's a white British indie band I turn it off. As a policy it rarely lets me down.
ReplyDeleteHighlights of the couch potato Glastonbury as witnessed on TV:
ReplyDeleteArcade Fire, Bjork, Iggy, Arctic monkeys
Lowlights:
The Who, some BBC presenters, faceless interchangeable indie bands
Concur with your son. As a glasto veteran i think this years was one of the poorest for while. It's basically in the wrong place the eavis' are never going to admit this but it's very wet bit of the world and the much vauted drainage works had little effect it was as wet as ever plus as it gets bigger walking from one place to another gets tiresome. Also performances that look good on tv are sometimes poor live and vice versa. The Monkeys we thought didn't cut it as a headliners. Arctic fire were very good as were the earlies, and waterboys. It was good to see madness play a secret gig but the sound was rubbish and the set up dangerous it was lucky no one was injured. On the whole after 20 years of going I would think hard about going again, how do you tell what the weathers going to be like when you have to buy tickets for gigs 6-8 months in advance?
ReplyDeleteAm I the only person who finds themself thinking how smelly her hair must be when watching Amy Winehouse? I'm sure in real life she's a very hygenic young lady, but watching her warbling away on the telly I found myself distracted by thoughts of shampoo and better fitting clothes.
ReplyDeleteStart wearing purple, wearing purple...
ReplyDeleteI know they are the current critics' darlings but I am largely unmoved by Arcade Fire. There may be lot of them hitting/strumming/blowing a lot of different instruments but it just sounds like a shapeless racket to me. Their Glastonbury set (seen on TV only) didn't change my opinion.
ReplyDeleteJohn, I've seen Ms Winehouse serving in my local. Imagine finding one of her hairs in your meat pie...
ReplyDeleteIs it wrong for a 36 year-old to think that John Fogerty was one of this year's highlights? I find bands like Editors and Bloc Party to be completely devoid of charisma, stage craft and, most importantly, decent tunes.
ReplyDelete