Joy Division more influential, important and significant than The Smiths?

 

Naaaaahhh.... no way... no way at all. Ask 1000 music fans to name 5 JD songs - that'll prove how genuinely influential the band are.

 

JD made some great songs, don't get me wrong - but they've been elevated to this Godlike status this past decade - which is utterly ridiculous bearing in mind you're talking about a band who had a lead singer whose vocals could, at best, be described as umm... 'interesting'. New Order... well... now you're talking influential. Let's be honest - JD never, ever made a record as accomplished, groundbreaking or important as Blue Monday. But New Order, again, were blighted with a lead singer who simply can't sing his way out of a paper bag.

 

But Barney does dance better than Ian Curtis did, I'll give him that.

 

I'm totally with Rob on JD.... they're a good band who I liked a lot back then. Now? Their legacy has been overshadowed by myth, legend and folklore..... and their music has been kind of forgotten about.... which, I think, may not be a bad thing. Because in the cold light of day, JD only had a handful of really great songs.

 

It's almost sacrilege to say this.... but it's my honest opinion. JD were a band that it was achingly hip to namedrop back then....... and nothing much has changed.... their name and their myth will always interest people more than their actual musical output.

TBH I think you're barking up the wrong tree with New order being more influential. I think New Order will become more influential as time goes on and the early albums are rediscovered by a new generation. But in the last 4 or 5 years JD have been immeasurably more influential whether it has resulted in vital music or not.

 

I think The Smiths have been more influential than either of them as well, both through Morrissey and his lyrics through to that Marr guitar sound.

 

And who cares if Ian Curtis or Barney couldn't sing for toffee. Since when has that stopped numerous bands making vital rock music.

And since when did that make something like Atmosphere anything other than utterly irresistable.

 

I have always said that I would prefer to have someone who sounded interesting and could just about hold a tune than some technically good warbler who makes everything sound bland.

Joy Division more influential, important and significant than The Smiths?

 

Naaaaahhh.... no way... no way at all. Ask 1000 music fans to name 5 JD songs - that'll prove how genuinely influential the band are.

 

JD made some great songs, don't get me wrong - but they've been elevated to this Godlike status this past decade - which is utterly ridiculous bearing in mind you're talking about a band who had a lead singer whose vocals could, at best, be described as umm... 'interesting'. New Order... well... now you're talking influential. Let's be honest - JD never, ever made a record as accomplished, groundbreaking or important as Blue Monday. But New Order, again, were blighted with a lead singer who simply can't sing his way out of a paper bag.

 

But Barney does dance better than Ian Curtis did, I'll give him that.

 

I'm totally with Rob on JD.... they're a good band who I liked a lot back then. Now? Their legacy has been overshadowed by myth, legend and folklore..... and their music has been kind of forgotten about.... which, I think, may not be a bad thing. Because in the cold light of day, JD only had a handful of really great songs.

 

It's almost sacrilege to say this.... but it's my honest opinion. JD were a band that it was achingly hip to namedrop back then....... and nothing much has changed.... their name and their myth will always interest people more than their actual musical output.

 

id certainly put the smiths above jd too..

 

and (the emboldend bit) is the trouble with todays society... they like being hyped up into a frenzy ala reality tv show stylee.... x factor fans, crying and baying for blood or for hysteric adolation over an ephemeral act. this is exactly why jade goody got so much publicity, it why jacko is being hailed as some godlike entity and why fans ignored his misdemeanours.

 

yes jd were good, and ifluencial...to a degree, but tbh id put them no more influencial then xtc or squeeze, their contemporaries who actually scored more commercial success on the back of VERY respectible material. but i guess its easy for me to criticise them as i was never a fan of either jd or new orders music. i prefer the kinks, small faces, yardbirds, animals and squeeze and xtc.... (for inovative guitar based pop)

Joy Division more influential, important and significant than The Smiths?

 

Naaaaahhh.... no way... no way at all. Ask 1000 music fans to name 5 JD songs - that'll prove how genuinely influential the band are.

 

...get them to name 5 Smiths songs then. I don't think the number who can in each case would differ much.

But Barney does dance better than Ian Curtis did, I'll give him that.

 

What? Barney's arse shake better than Ian's military-precision pseudo-fits? Never!

 

I agree with Mr Grimly too about the Horrors, the only other UK band who are close to approximating what music used to be like are Sky Larkin who did a half-decent post-grunge US college rock impression back in late winter. Conversely, the same week, the American act Pains of Being Pure at Heart released my album of the year - one that unashamedly dined out on JAMC, Ride, early Boo Radleys etc. All the good stuff basically that JD...and The Smiths...helped to influence.

 

Both were hugely influential, as were New Order, let's not argue over who was "the most" as they helped generate three different strands of music with their influence. The main acts to have had such profound influence since were the Mondays, Stone Roses, The Auteurs and Oasis (and we all know what they helped generate - a decade and a half of stodgy dad rock - thanks!)

 

...get them to name 5 Smiths songs then. I don't think the number who can in each case would differ much.

 

Joe Public, and even a small percentage of them, will name Love Will Tear Us Apart - JD's ONLY big single.

 

The Smiths had way over 20 hit singles - so it's a safe bet to say the average music fan will be able to reel off more of their names, be more familiar with their material, and will have seen a greater dent in popular culture from The Smiths than Joy Division.

 

The Smiths were, are and always will be a musical phenomenon that Joy Division simply will never match.

Joy Division more influential, important and significant than The Smiths?

 

Naaaaahhh.... no way... no way at all. Ask 1000 music fans to name 5 JD songs - that'll prove how genuinely influential the band are.

 

JD made some great songs, don't get me wrong - but they've been elevated to this Godlike status this past decade - which is utterly ridiculous bearing in mind you're talking about a band who had a lead singer whose vocals could, at best, be described as umm... 'interesting'. New Order... well... now you're talking influential. Let's be honest - JD never, ever made a record as accomplished, groundbreaking or important as Blue Monday. But New Order, again, were blighted with a lead singer who simply can't sing his way out of a paper bag.

 

But Barney does dance better than Ian Curtis did, I'll give him that.

 

I'm totally with Rob on JD.... they're a good band who I liked a lot back then. Now? Their legacy has been overshadowed by myth, legend and folklore..... and their music has been kind of forgotten about.... which, I think, may not be a bad thing. Because in the cold light of day, JD only had a handful of really great songs.

 

It's almost sacrilege to say this.... but it's my honest opinion. JD were a band that it was achingly hip to namedrop back then....... and nothing much has changed.... their name and their myth will always interest people more than their actual musical output.

 

Come on Russ, even Morrissey wouldn't have the brass balls to imply he was "superior" to Joy Division.... No JD, no Smiths; in fact, no JD, no Jesus and Mary Chain, Interol, Editors, Coldplay (not that that would be a bad thing....), White Lies, The Horrors, Black Rebel Motorcyle Club, etc, etc, ad infinitum .... Simple equation really mate..... :rolleyes: to downplay JD's significance is incredbily foolish, I expected better of you for heavens' sake, you sound like some sort of clueless 14-year old Emo here tbh mate.... I suppose you reckon that The Strokes are musically superior to Velvet Underground then just cos The Strokes have sold a few more records.... Balderdash.....

 

So fukkin' what if Curtis didn't exactly have the most "technically accomplished" vocal in the world.... The fact that his style was "interesting", rather than bland and unremarkable (ie, the vocalists in Editors and White Lies to name but two...) was kind of what made Curtis and JD individuals rather than just sounding like everyone else....

 

 

 

and (the emboldend bit) is the trouble with todays society... they like being hyped up into a frenzy ala reality tv show stylee.... x factor fans, crying and baying for blood or for hysteric adolation over an ephemeral act. this is exactly why jade goody got so much publicity, it why jacko is being hailed as some godlike entity and why fans ignored his misdemeanours.

 

Mate, just WTF are you talking about here..... In what parallel universe can you even compare sh!t like this to Joy Division and the Factory movement...... :blink: It's a just a BIT like comparing a vintage Chateau Lafitte to a bottle of £2.99 battery acid from Iceland....... :P

 

For the most part, what JD/New Order/Factory influenced has been overwhelmingly positive for music and Popular Culture generally, even some of the dodgier bands that JD/NO influenced I would say are still better than any crud that's come out of mainstream/manufactured Pop purely by virtue of the fact that at least the music is being created by musicians and not manufactured by moguls or nebulous svengali types.... What Cowell and Reality TV has 'inspired' is utterly damaging to Popular culture and music.....

 

Sorry mate, you're dead wrong.... JD/NO/Factory represented something vastly more positive and healthy for this country's musical culture...... Granted, some of the more foolish 14 year old Emo armcutters out there may take things overboard, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater here.....

Mate, just WTF are you talking about here..... In what parallel universe can you even compare sh!t like this to Joy Division and the Factory movement...... :blink: It's a just a BIT like comparing a vintage Chateau Lafitte to a bottle of £2.99 battery acid from Iceland....... :P

 

For the most part, what JD/New Order/Factory influenced has been overwhelmingly positive for music and Popular Culture generally, even some of the dodgier bands that JD/NO influenced I would say are still better than any crud that's come out of mainstream/manufactured Pop purely by virtue of the fact that at least the music is being created by musicians and not manufactured by moguls or nebulous svengali types.... What Cowell and Reality TV has 'inspired' is utterly damaging to Popular culture and music.....

 

Sorry mate, you're dead wrong.... JD/NO/Factory represented something vastly more positive and healthy for this country's musical culture...... Granted, some of the more foolish 14 year old Emo armcutters out there may take things overboard, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater here.....

 

im not denying that, just the magnitude of their influence, there were other acts around who could have easily fitted the bill without jd...

im not denying that, just the magnitude of their influence, there were other acts around who could have easily fitted the bill without jd...

 

Well, mate, sorry, but I can barely think of a UK Indie band in the mid-80s/90s who weren't touched by JD/NO/Factory in some way, including The Smiths (let's face it, "How Soon Is Now" is probably the best song Ian Curtis never wrote.. :lol: ).... And now all the bands today such as Interpol, White Lies, The Horrors, BRMC, Editors, etc....... JD's contemporaries were the likes of Buzzcocks, Bauhaus, Cocteau Twins, The Cure, Siouxsie, etc.... All great bands, but apart from Siouxsie, nobody of that era really has as great a reach in terms of influence as JD do......

 

I honestly can't see a shred of similarity or JD influence in any Smiths song, Scott.... in fact, JD were the kind of arty, pretentious act Morrissey would have despised - their artiness and pretentiousness is in a different field to Morrissey's.... he was more influenced by the arthouse lipstick swagger of New York Dolls, the campness of Sparks, Buzzcocks and Klaus Nomi.... JD, I think, were far too dark and unglamorous for him.

 

And Johnny Marr, whilst he obviously admired JD, he's gone on record saying they weren't an influence....

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player...tid=25295955001

I reckon I agree with Russ - although The Smiths picked up a lot of Joy Division's ex-fans who weren't so keen on New Order's new dance direction, I don't think they were actually influenced by the music per se. 'How Soon Is Now?' is the closest to JD in sound and that started out as a B-side.

I honestly can't see a shred of similarity or JD influence in any Smiths song, Scott.... in fact, JD were the kind of arty, pretentious act Morrissey would have despised

 

Just where the fukk do you get this ridiculous notion that JD were "arty and pretentious" anyway Russ.....?? Hooky was about arty and pretentious as a beer bottle to the face and would probably hit you with a pool cue if you accused him of such a thing... They were all working class lads from Macclesfield, living on estates. You're only "pretentious" if you're pretending to be summat you're not mate.... And Ian Curtis sure as hell wasn't "pretending" to have psychiatric problems or epilepsy, he fukkin HAD them.... I have no doubt that Curtis' very real inner demons were what made the music (certainly the lyrics) turn out the way it did, you could probably accuse New Order of being a bit pretentious, but not Joy Division....

 

God, some people who really should know better aint half talking some rubbish about Joy Division in this thread...... They were one of the original Indie bands, they helped kick off the whole scene, end of.... Downplaying JD's significance to indie/alternative music is a bit like downplaying The Beatles' significance to pop music..... Ridiculous and innaccurate.....

God, some people who really should know better aint half talking some rubbish about Joy Division in this thread...... They were one of the original Indie bands, they helped kick off the whole scene, end of.... Downplaying JD's significance to indie/alternative music is a bit like downplaying The Beatles' significance to pop music..... Ridiculous and innaccurate.....

 

youre begining to sound like a jacko fan, youll be refering to ian curtis as 'the king of indie' next :lol:

 

tbh im not so sure 'indie' is a genre, i always considered indie as more palatable version of new wave/punk, drawing heavily on the r n b groups of the 60's for inspiration.

youre begining to sound like a jacko fan, youll be refering to ian curtis as 'the king of indie' next :lol:

 

Not at all... I wont defend the appalling way he treated his wife with the affairs, etc.... And sometimes, I do think he kind of "copped out" a bit by committing suicide, I think Steve Coogan as Tony Wilson's "silly bugger" reaction in the film "24 Hour Party People" is kind of how I feel about it myself, but given his psychiatric state, he probably saw it as his only way out; he was certainly a genuinely troubled soul, not some angsty Emo kid who self-harms to get themselves attention, and late 70s/early 80s rough, working class Macclesfield/Manchester wasn't exactly open to the Americanised "counselling" culture really, was it.....? :rolleyes: Overly-romanticising Curtis and Emo poseurs who name drop just to appear cool, is one end, but the opposite end is down-playing their significance to modern Indie culture, which is what I feel Russ is doing..... JD were as important to Alternative/Indie Culture as existed in the 80s/90s and now, as the Beatles were to Popular Culture.....

 

Ian Curtis was certainly damaged and I'm under no illusions as to who he was, but the only person he ultimately hurt in the end was himself, he certainly wasn't a bloody p**** was he....?

tbh im not so sure 'indie' is a genre, i always considered indie as more palatable version of new wave/punk, drawing heavily on the r n b groups of the 60's for inspiration.

 

When are you going to drop this indie isn't a genre thing, you've just written a de facto definition.

When are you going to drop this indie isn't a genre thing, you've just written a de facto definition.

 

tbh i just see it as a branch of guitar based pop ala 60's stylee, but then again im a huge fan of 60's guitar pop , mod, r n b, psychadelia, west coast, beat, et al.

tbh i just see it as a branch of guitar based pop ala 60's stylee, but then again im a huge fan of 60's guitar pop , mod, r n b, psychadelia, west coast, beat, et al.

 

Well, yeah, I mean, the likes of My Bloody Valentine, Sonic Youth, JAMC, etc certainly played guitars, but really, it's really about all they had in common with Mod, Merseybeat, R n B, etc......

 

Well, yeah, I mean, the likes of My Bloody Valentine, Sonic Youth, JAMC, etc certainly played guitars, but really, it's really about all they had in common with Mod, Merseybeat, R n B, etc......

 

im not saying 'indie' didnt progress what the 60's established, indeed it did, naturaly, im just doubting though that it is a seperate genre, surely its a sub-genre? but then again i guess that the original sound dont exist as such now so 'indie' is all thats left.