Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Critiquing Oasis

So my other half somehow managed to bag two tickets for £100 each. They seem to already be priced at £1000 on the reselling sites. Cash out now while there's all this hype or wait till closer to the time?

I personally have no interest in going really,
Sell, take your initial outlay back and 300 quid for your troubles and donate the rest to Medical Aid for Palestine
 
It's not really the band's fault. I mean they were too expensive to start with I guess but the reselling market is absurd. Go take a look at viagogo. £350 is a bargain. Cheapest I can see right now is around the £800 mark. The area we seem to have our seats in is already at £1,500. Excruciating. Who the fuck pays that??
I didn't mention the band in this as it's the ticket companies that do it. £350 is not a bargain when that was not the advertised price as far as I can see. The band also agree to this...
 
I didn't mention the band in this as it's the ticket companies that do it. £350 is not a bargain when that was not the advertised price as far as I can see. The band also agree to this...
It is very much the band/promoter. It is they who instruct Ticketmaster to use surge/demand pricing or not.

But obviously for concerts that shouldn’t be a thing in the first place. With a service like Uber the argument is that high demand inflates the price, which attracts more drivers to the area to meet that demand, which then eases, so the price goes down.

These concerts have a fixed number of tickets. They knew it would sell out. It’s naked profiteering, pure and simple.

The fun bit now comes if/when they announce more shows. If tickets go back on at the original price I image there will be a legion of pissed off fans who have now paid over twice that price.
 
It's popular music, pop music ,that lots of people seem to like .... It's just another band.... everyone needs to calm down, if I started writing essays about every band I thought was a bit crap id spend the rest of my life doing it.
Their biggest crime is being popular otherwise everyone would ignore them. They're not an enemy of beauty they're just another band.
Exactly. Liam is a monumental bel
She's always been contrary:


But her opinion piece is still an interesting read, if only for the fact that she brings up all the areas of criticism, but then doesn't address any of them (apart from the homophobia).

But yes, there's definitely two separate things going on: the band and their fans. I have zero interest in the band and their music, but their fanbase is more than just 40-something blokes reliving their long-lost youth; there genuinely appears to be youngsters who like unchallenging, uninteresting, meat-and-potatoes Rock from blokes older than their dads.

So, for them, it's not a nostalgia trip, they genuinely feel this fairly crude and lumpen stuff speaks to them in the 21st century. Which I find, frankly, incredible. But then, I'm not a parent, so what do I know about today's youngsters?
i honestly don’t think they were dull and mundane at the time. Put them on any stage anywhere in the country at that time, even underground arty places, and the crowd would have stopped what they were doing and watched. They were not “raw” in a self conscious way. They just were and that wwas what stopped people in their tracks.

Liam is a massive cock though. And they quickly became self conscious, quickly became a paradoy of themselves.
 
All the endless layers of class politics projected onto them are not really much to do with them in the final instance. Liam is utterly gross for the homophobia he has at times displayed though.
 
She's always been contrary:


But her opinion piece is still an interesting read, if only for the fact that she brings up all the areas of criticism, but then doesn't address any of them (apart from the homophobia).

But yes, there's definitely two separate things going on: the band and their fans. I have zero interest in the band and their music, but their fanbase is more than just 40-something blokes reliving their long-lost youth; there genuinely appears to be youngsters who like unchallenging, uninteresting, meat-and-potatoes Rock from blokes older than their dads.

So, for them, it's not a nostalgia trip, they genuinely feel this fairly crude and lumpen stuff speaks to them in the 21st century. Which I find, frankly, incredible. But then, I'm not a parent, so what do I know about today's youngsters?
That's a fucking terrible article.

Take this: So pervasive and crucial at the time, Britpop is now like a sexually transmitted disease – everyone was in the bed but no one admits to being infected by it.

Was Britpop so pervasive and crucial at the time? As I remember it clubs up and down the country were packed with people chewing their faces off to house and techno and jungle and drum & bass and trance and hip hop. For the vast numbers of people going out dancing every weekend Oasis and Blur were an irrelevance, something that popped up in the news from time to time as guitar loving rockist music critics couldn't deal with their beloved pervasive and crucial guitar music being pushed aside for a time, something that kept the tabloids in copy as Noel & Meg went somewhere and did something. People don't admit to being infected by Britpop because despite the impression, the myth, that rock critics like to promote, many many people just didn't give a shit.

She goes on to describe people reacting negatively to a week of 'oh gosh how momentous Oasis are reforming' headlines as undiluted class hatred. As if Oasis were the sole expression of working class culture in the 90s. You want to see 90s working class culture? This is what it looked like to me:



She thinks hating on Oasis is class snobishness, then in her telling of the 90s she erases what many working class youth were actually doing from the story, so that she can fill up some words in yet another hype piece about some mediocre rock band reforming.

I normally try not to hate on bands I'm not into, as we all have different tastes and I listen to loads of stuff that other people think is terrible but I'm so fucking bored of hearing about fucking Oasis as headline news for a week, the hype leading to people to dutifully try to spend hundreds of pounds to buy tickets to see a band they're not really that fussed about so they can be part of something in this atomised pseudo-society we live in.
 
You want to see 90s working class culture? This is what it looked like to me:


turns out having read the thread because we were wearing bucket hats we were petit booj <class traitorous behaviour

and tbf the rave scene at its peak was a mix of working, petit and mainly lower middle class with a few upper class characters behind the scenes where the money way....
 
She's always been contrary:


But her opinion piece is still an interesting read, if only for the fact that she brings up all the areas of criticism, but then doesn't address any of them (apart from the homophobia).

But yes, there's definitely two separate things going on: the band and their fans. I have zero interest in the band and their music, but their fanbase is more than just 40-something blokes reliving their long-lost youth; there genuinely appears to be youngsters who like unchallenging, uninteresting, meat-and-potatoes Rock from blokes older than their dads.

So, for them, it's not a nostalgia trip, they genuinely feel this fairly crude and lumpen stuff speaks to them in the 21st century. Which I find, frankly, incredible. But then, I'm not a parent, so what do I know about today's youngsters?

turns out having read the thread because we were wearing bucket hats we were petit booj <class traitorous behaviour

and tbf the rave scene at its peak was a mix of working, petit and mainly lower middle class with a few upper class characters behind the scenes where the money way....
And just as full of homophobic atttitudes and racism as any other scene.
 
That's a fucking terrible article.

Take this: So pervasive and crucial at the time, Britpop is now like a sexually transmitted disease – everyone was in the bed but no one admits to being infected by it.

Was Britpop so pervasive and crucial at the time? As I remember it clubs up and down the country were packed with people chewing their faces off to house and techno and jungle and drum & bass and trance and hip hop. For the vast numbers of people going out dancing every weekend Oasis and Blur were an irrelevance, something that popped up in the news from time to time as guitar loving rockist music critics couldn't deal with their beloved pervasive and crucial guitar music being pushed aside for a time, something that kept the tabloids in copy as Noel & Meg went somewhere and did something. People don't admit to being infected by Britpop because despite the impression, the myth, that rock critics like to promote, many many people just didn't give a shit.

She goes on to describe people reacting negatively to a week of 'oh gosh how momentous Oasis are reforming' headlines as undiluted class hatred. As if Oasis were the sole expression of working class culture in the 90s. You want to see 90s working class culture? This is what it looked like to me:



She thinks hating on Oasis is class snobishness, then in her telling of the 90s she erases what many working class youth were actually doing from the story, so that she can fill up some words in yet another hype piece about some mediocre rock band reforming.

I normally try not to hate on bands I'm not into, as we all have different tastes and I listen to loads of stuff that other people think is terrible but I'm so fucking bored of hearing about fucking Oasis as headline news for a week, the hype leading to people to dutifully try to spend hundreds of pounds to buy tickets to see a band they're not really that fussed about so they can be part of something in this atomised pseudo-society we live in.

:thumbs:

Oasis were one of the bands that might have appeared on the radio for a few seconds while I was changing a cassette in the car. But different strokes...

I used to think there should be laws to prevent tickets being sold above face value, but nowadays I just find it comical that anyone would pay ridiculous prices to watch a couple of old men singing the same stuff they sang 20 years previous.
 
And just as full of homophobic atttitudes and racism as any other scene.

Reggae/Dancehall etc spring to mind. Totally racist and homophobic lyrics just seem to be overlooked, all the time. I don't recall Oasis referring to batty boys particularly often.
 
Isn't Liam's solo set basically Oasis' greatest hits anyway? Just played the whole of Definitely... on his last tour, so why are people losing their minds, and their savings, on something they could have seen last month. Basically. Noel's not going to add much guitar-wise. Don't get it.
 
What's The Story was probably the first foreign cassette tape I bought but I never considered Oasis a band I'd like to see live. "We're cunts but you love us" attitude felt off-putting. I think they're a good band and I still like some of the songs (D'Yer Wanna Be A Spaceman!) but I wouldn't pay £30 to see them live. And it's nothing to do with their age or hype, I just like a culture of mutual respect between musicians and their audience. I'm not surprised that people are hard on Oasis. If your whole marketing strategy is about being a cunt, can't be surprised when you're treated like one.
 
Reggae/Dancehall etc spring to mind. Totally racist and homophobic lyrics just seem to be overlooked, all the time. I don't recall Oasis referring to batty boys particularly often.
…and let’s not even start am with hip hop
 
She's always been contrary:


But her opinion piece is still an interesting read, if only for the fact that she brings up all the areas of criticism, but then doesn't address any of them (apart from the homophobia).

But yes, there's definitely two separate things going on: the band and their fans. I have zero interest in the band and their music, but their fanbase is more than just 40-something blokes reliving their long-lost youth; there genuinely appears to be youngsters who like unchallenging, uninteresting, meat-and-potatoes Rock from blokes older than their dads.

So, for them, it's not a nostalgia trip, they genuinely feel this fairly crude and lumpen stuff speaks to them in the 21st century. Which I find, frankly, incredible. But then, I'm not a parent, so what do I know about today's youngsters?
From that article:
Ellen said:
Yet all these years on, is it time to properly unpick the meaning of Oasis, then and now? Also to ask, how will the 90s Mancunian working-class rock behemoths affect 21st century culture? As just another heritage act trudging around the nostalgia circuit – or will it be a lot more interesting than that?
The first one, mate. I'm pretty sure it's gonna be the first one.
 
The corner of the rave scene I was part of wasn’t, the acceptance of everyone there was on of its many plus points.
A lot of the people I had grown up with well into drum and bass and garage were violent, criminal and homophobic. Maybe not during the rave itself but still very much there and the music had little or no affect. While the ideology that expressed itself because of raves was amazing, all under one roof raving etc, scratch beneath the surface and of course attitudes were there.

Anyway I still think this is great:
 
Apparently, at peak wally, there were 800k people in the queue for tickets at Croke Park, where 85 quid tickets jumped to 350 quid by the time people got to buy them. That was just one point in time. There probably aren't that many people in Ireland who would know an Oasis tune if it came on the radio, so I'm guessing most were either planning to travel, or were planning on buying the tickets to price gouge, and I reckon there were probably more of the latter.
So I had a rethink about whether there should be laws to prevent this, but I'm still undecided on it, as surely some onus should also fall on the buyer who's willing to pay thousands for a ticket that should cost 50 quid. Then I looked at it from another angle... what if the fans who buy tickets at massively inflated prices from price gougers are actually worse than the people selling them. The sellers aren't fans, they're just in it to make a few quid, but the people buying the tickets from them are fans, and they're either depriving other fans of a ticket, or massively inflating prices for them, but because they have a few quid spare and don't care how it affects others, they selfishly buy their way to the front of the queue.
I'm beginning to think maybe there should be laws against selling AND buying tickets above face value, with ridiculously harsh sentences for both.
 
Apparently, at peak wally, there were 800k people in the queue for tickets at Croke Park, where 85 quid tickets jumped to 350 quid by the time people got to buy them. That was just one point in time. There probably aren't that many people in Ireland who would know an Oasis tune if it came on the radio, so I'm guessing most were either planning to travel, or were planning on buying the tickets to price gouge, and I reckon there were probably more of the latter.
So I had a rethink about whether there should be laws to prevent this, but I'm still undecided on it, as surely some onus should also fall on the buyer who's willing to pay thousands for a ticket that should cost 50 quid. Then I looked at it from another angle... what if the fans who buy tickets at massively inflated prices from price gougers are actually worse than the people selling them. The sellers aren't fans, they're just in it to make a few quid, but the people buying the tickets from them are fans, and they're either depriving other fans of a ticket, or massively inflating prices for them, but because they have a few quid spare and don't care how it affects others, they selfishly buy their way to the front of the queue.
I'm beginning to think maybe there should be laws against selling AND buying tickets above face value, with ridiculously harsh sentences for both.

It’s only basically what happens in housing. Though you don’t hear anyone in the government muttering about making laws there.
 
It is very much the band/promoter. It is they who instruct Ticketmaster to use surge/demand pricing or not.

But obviously for concerts that shouldn’t be a thing in the first place. With a service like Uber the argument is that high demand inflates the price, which attracts more drivers to the area to meet that demand, which then eases, so the price goes down.

These concerts have a fixed number of tickets. They knew it would sell out. It’s naked profiteering, pure and simple.

The fun bit now comes if/when they announce more shows. If tickets go back on at the original price I image there will be a legion of pissed off fans who have now paid over twice that price.
Yeah, if ever there was a series of gigs where the band have the power and call the shots, this is it.
 
A few yrs ago Springsteen fans were moaning about Ticketmaster using dynamic pricing for his shows. Some thought ‘man of the people’ Bruce would surely do something about it if he knew what was going on. But when asked he said nothing more than ‘out of my hands, buddy’. Which, as we all know, was bollocks, and from someone like him that did come across as hypercritical.

But that’s one thing we can’t level against the Gallaghers because, one thing that’s never been in any doubt, is that the main thing they ever cared about was getting rich. I clearly remember Noel after their first flush of success boasting about how many million he had in the bank. It’s the main reason the likes of the Sun loved them, cos here was two working class lads totally in yer face about making shitloads of dosh. Proper aspirational, that.

So it’s not so much a case of them being honest working class lads made good (money) and if you don’t like them then you’re a snob. It’s about your attitude to musicians whose artistic ambitions start and end with becoming rich and famous. If you share their values - and clearly lots of people do - then you’ll probably defend them to the hilt and open up your wallet. And that’s fine. But that’s really all they’re about.
 
Back
Top Bottom