In the great British tradition of saying something somewhat ridiculous and controversial in order to generate buzz for your latest project, former Suede frontman Brett Anderson has taken on Britpop calling the ’90s movement “horrible” and a “whole boozy, cartoon-like, fake working-class thing” that his band had nothing to do with. This is somewhat contrary to Anderson’s appearance on the cover of Brit mag Select while posing in front of a Union Jack/being thrown into said mag’s “Battle For Britain”/promoting the band’s first album, not to mention the band’s inclusion on nearly every Britpop-themed compilation available, but hey, why not. As of today, Suede is, and was, not a Britpop act. Feel free to go back to whatever you were doing. [Guardian]
News Flash: Suede Weren’t “Britpop”
Categories:
Uncategorized
Uncategorized
NME and “Live Forever: The Rise and Fall of Britpop” beg to differ…
Faded Rockstar In “I Am A Self-Important Windbag” Shocker.
More on this at eleven…
Does that mean the Tears aren’t nu-Britpop?
@DJorn: Does that mean McAlmont & Butler aren’t brown-eyed Britpop?
Yeah, ’cause ‘New-Glam’ was SUCH a better term…
What’s Britpop?
@Clevertrousers: A devastatingly bad Britney Spears dance.
This won’t stop “The Drowners” and “Animal Nitrate” from appearing on Britpop compelations and nightclub’s Britpop theme night playlists until the universe collapses in on itself.
Also, if they’re not a Britpop band…then they’re either an indie rock band or an alternative rock band which despite being my favorite genres of music are just as meaningless as the term “Britpop”.
There are a lot of descriptive words that can be bestowed upon Suede and their “legacy.” Britpop is actually a compliment for the band so I’d advise Mr. Anderson to keep quiet because the alternatives aren’t great.
Suede needs to do something for Suede, and if Suede needs to stop being Britpop for a while, that’s just what Suede will do.
Oh, sorry, wrong Suede. Never mind.
@Ned Raggett:
Yeah, it was supposed to be them and Adorable and fuckifIcanrecallwhoelse…think the NME was to blame for that particular gem.
@Lapinot:
Thanks, classes starting today has had me a bit frazzled/brain-dead.
@Dick Laurent is dead.: And Sweet Jesus, the Bardots and (the) Verve.
Also, Brett has a point and even at the time I remember people saying that Suede were apart from all that. Dog Man Star was quite a distance from the Blur-Oasis battle.
@Lapinot: And I think it was Paul Lester at Melody Maker who came up with the name New Glam Association.
Weren’t Suede supposed to be the originators? The reason the U.K embraced the sounds of London, Manchester and everywhere in between over the imported dirge of grunge? Beating out Blur by, um well, weeks. I’m pretty sure Brett claimed to be the true genius behind the return of British themes and concerns in popular music in Great Britain? Hmm that’s a lot to say, if only there was a shorter way to say “British” and “popular”…
@Lapinot: And Sweet Jesus,
Hey, I said them already, darn it! [/petty complaint]
@Ned Raggett: Sorry! I somehow missed that until after I’d pressed ’submit comment’.
@Dick Laurent is dead.: Yeah, ’cause ‘New-Glam’ was SUCH a better term…
Anyway, Sweet Jesus, then.
@Michaelangelo Matos: Y’know, SOMEBODY had to say it. I just hate you beat me to it.
well they were always better than blur, pulp, oasis, cast, la’s , elastica, dodgy, echobelly, and all the other cuunts you wanna name.
except mozza.
They also came before all those bands. A few months before, but Suede was largely done by the time Blur and Oasis got huge in ‘94/’95.