Wound up by hall of fame

I know it's only a TV programme, but I get sick of the lack of credit that NO get, and the only attention is paid to the JD years. I realise the importance of them, but, personally have never got into them, and find it an absolute farce that New Order's output is completely ignored,in favour of JD's admittedley seminal career, but one that ended in mid 1980. Why was it totally out of the question to have JO in 70's and NO in the 80's? Oh, and REM were MASSIVE in the 80's too, weren't they? NO never get the credit they deserve, especially for re-inventing themselves after their tragic start. Has anyone else ever done that? Nuff said. Rant over.

Joy Division has a "genius" frontman who "tragically" topped himself on the "cusp of global superstardom"; New Order were a "faceless" band for much of the 80s who were mostly known for being awkward, moody bastards.

Which is the sexier entry in the Tawdry Grand Rawk League?

Who cares if the media acknowledges their achievements or not, they have made and continue to make great music and that is all that matters to us loyal fans

I think Doctor Clayhead sums it up. The vast majority of the public don't really care about New Order. The band don't have the same cult status as Joy Division or the Smiths have.

New Order still get quite a lot of credit compared to bands such as the Bee Gee's who are the second most sucessful song writers after Lennon/McCartney.

Anyway do you really want endless crappy boy bands making covers of True Faith?

News might be thin on the ground.....

I posted a similar rant this morning on another thread...

I personally think They were better as New Order. JD wasn't an 80s band, New Order were. That program was really badly made, shame on the people that were involved choosing the bands and who ever made it.

I don't think I will ever like them as JD to be honest, the music just isn't my thing. I'd rather listen to True Faith, Round & Round than shitty music such as She's Lost Control, so dull, depressing, and boring. Only JD song that I think is actually worth listening too is LWTUA. As New Order I think they are much better and that's just the way it has turned out, they ARE New Order.

Originally posted by marcus mee I know it's only a TV programme, but I get sick of the lack of credit that NO get, and the only attention is paid to the JD years. I realise the importance of them, but, personally have never got into them, and find it an absolute farce that New Order's output is completely ignored,in favour of JD's admittedley seminal career, but one that ended in mid 1980. Why was it totally out of the question to have JO in 70's and NO in the 80's? Oh, and REM were MASSIVE in the 80's too, weren't they? NO never get the credit they deserve, especially for re-inventing themselves after their tragic start. Has anyone else ever done that? Nuff said. Rant over.

As regards JD's inclusion, the first thing to strike me was that they were mentioned in the 1980's at all. The 1980's began in 1981, just as the seventies began in 1971 and ended in 1980[1]. So JD did not exist for one second of the 1980's and had no business being there...and why the F*ing colour wheel in the intro to the show if NO don;t get a mention.....oh yeah , just another way to rip off their "cool".

[1] The most interesting thing about the 20th century is that according to media retards and politicians, it only had 99 years, having started on 1st jan 1901, but ended a year early (owing to a worldwide lack of intelligence) on 31st dec 1999. <<<< if you want to call me an anal pedant that;s fine, but please don;t argue this, it's totally correct.

Originally posted by Adam R I'd rather listen to True Faith, Round & Round than shitty music such as She's Lost Control, so dull, depressing, and boring. Only JD song that I think is actually worth listening too is LWTUA. .

Fook me I've read it all now. Come back JSB, there is a bigger moron amongst us to challenge your crown. Does the R stand for Retard?

Not bothered about them winning owt but must admit it was great to hear everyone talk about IAN and their music then.Quality stuff and i must admit to having a wry smile with SHAUN's comments.Fancy him being your best mate.Hell it is like someone in the BLOB SHOP saying ROCKET MICK is my best mate.Beggars bloody belief!Only tuned in for their bit and recorded it so don't know who is in or out.But must dash as i now frequent the IAN HUNTER and DAVID BOWIE message boards.Don't post but just need a bit of a rest from NEW ORDER.Mind you some quality discussions on that JOY DIVISION CENTRAL. Regards ROCKET MICK

Originally posted by oldmonkey > Originally posted by Adam R> I'd rather listen to True Faith, Round & Round than shitty music such as She's Lost Control, so dull, depressing, and boring. Only JD song that I think is actually worth listening too is LWTUA. .

Fook me I've read it all now. Come back JSB, there is a bigger moron amongst us to challenge your crown. Does the R stand for Retard?

Just being honest. I personally don't like the sound of JD and much prefer NO's. Just a matter of personal opinion at the end of the day, doesn't mean that I am a retard. You like JD? I have no problems with that...

Did Ian Curtis even know Shuan Ryder? There is no mention of him in Debbie's book. Also I would have thought Ryder and co were a bit young at the time. He probably just turned up to a few JD gigs or somthing.

Has anybody contacted Channel 4 to ask them to explain why JD were featured and not New Order? As much as I love JD I do think it should have been New Order featured. I reckon just about everybody in the western world has heared a New Order song (probably without knowing) the same probably can't be said about JD.

Originally posted by Adam R > Originally posted by oldmonkey > Originally posted by Adam R> I'd rather listen to True Faith, Round & Round than shitty music such as She's Lost Control, so dull, depressing, and boring. Only JD song that I think is actually worth listening too is LWTUA. .

Fook me I've read it all now. Come back JSB, there is a bigger moron amongst us to challenge your crown. Does the R stand for Retard?

Just being honest. I personally don't like the sound of JD and much prefer NO's. Just a matter of personal opinion at the end of the day, doesn't mean that I am a retard. You like JD? I have no problems with that...

I suppose JD were a bit more raw and punky. Punk isn't my thing either but when you get into JD you realise there is much more to it. If you listen to the Closer album you do get the taste that if JD may have made pretty much the same the music as New Order just without Barney's voice.

One of the people talking about JD said how JDs sound lives on in the sound of New Order.This has been said many times before but its still stated as if its a surprise almost.Its obvious the sound is going to carry on in some way so why is that so strange?

Originally posted by Steve Campbell > Originally posted by marcus mee> I know it's only a TV programme, but I get sick of the lack of credit that NO get, and the only attention is paid to the JD years. I realise the importance of them, but, personally have never got into them, and find it an absolute farce that New Order's output is completely ignored,in favour of JD's admittedley seminal career, but one that ended in mid 1980. Why was it totally out of the question to have JO in 70's and NO in the 80's? Oh, and REM were MASSIVE in the 80's too, weren't they? NO never get the credit they deserve, especially for re-inventing themselves after their tragic start. Has anyone else ever done that? Nuff said. Rant over.

As regards JD's inclusion, the first thing to strike me was that they were mentioned in the 1980's at all. The 1980's began in 1981, just as the seventies began in 1971 and ended in 1980[1]. So JD did not exist for one second of the 1980's and had no business being there...and why the F*ing colour wheel in the intro to the show if NO don;t get a mention.....oh yeah , just another way to rip off their "cool".

[1] The most interesting thing about the 20th century is that according to media retards and politicians, it only had 99 years, having started on 1st jan 1901, but ended a year early (owing to a worldwide lack of intelligence) on 31st dec 1999. <<<< if you want to call me an anal pedant that;s fine, but please don;t argue this, it's totally correct. I think that the Nineteen Eighties began in Nineteen Eighty, hence '1980'...

Originally posted by Steve Campbell As regards JD's inclusion, the first thing to strike me was that they were mentioned in the 1980's at all.The 1980's began in 1981, just as the seventies began in 1971 and ended in 1980[1]. So JD did not exist for one second of the 1980's and had no business being there...and why the F*ing colour wheel in the intro to the show if NO don;t get a mention.....oh yeah , just another way to rip off their "cool".[1] The most interesting thing about the 20th century is that according to media retards and politicians, it only had 99 years, having started on 1st jan 1901, but ended a year early (owing to a worldwide lack of intelligence) on 31st dec 1999. <<<< if you want to call me an anal pedant that;s fine, but please don;t argue this, it's totally correct.

I'm totally with you on this one Steve :stupid:

Originally posted by Voice Of Treason . One of the people talking about JD said how JDs sound lives on in the sound of New Order.This has been said many times before but its still stated as if its a surprise almost.Its obvious the sound is going to carry on in some way so why is that so strange?

I suppose because JD had a reputation of making bleak music where as New Order have a reputation for dance music.

Philip - Mathematicaly speaking the 1980' didn't begin until 1981.

Originally posted by Ian MadManc > Originally posted by Voice Of Treason .> One of the people talking about JD said how JDs sound lives on in the sound of New Order.This has been said many times before but its still stated as if its a surprise almost.Its obvious the sound is going to carry on in some way so why is that so strange?

I suppose because JD had a reputation of making bleak music where as New Order have a reputation for dance music.

Philip - Mathematicaly speaking the 1980' didn't begin until 1981.

C'mon, surely the "80's" began on 1 January 1980

1/1/80 - 31/12/80 = 1980 1/1/81 - 31/12/81 = 1981

and

so

on

Bloody pedants.;)

Originally posted by five hates six > Originally posted by Ian MadManc> > > > Originally posted by Voice Of Treason .> > One of the people talking about JD said how JDs sound lives on in the sound of New Order.This has been said many times before but its still stated as if its a surprise almost.Its obvious the sound is going to carry on in some way so why is that so strange?>

I suppose because JD had a reputation of making bleak music where as New Order have a reputation for dance music.

Philip - Mathematicaly speaking the 1980' didn't begin until 1981.

C'mon, surely the "80's" began on 1 January 1980

1/1/80 - 31/12/80 = 1980 1/1/81 - 31/12/81 = 1981

and

so

on

Yes, that's what they started telling people about 7 years ago or so, to hie the ignorance of our leaders on the subject of celebrating the 999 year milenium. But count back 80's were 80-89 70's were 70-79 We're still making perfect sense here using the "newspeak" calender.So we'll skip nearly 2000 years....... the 2nd decade AD would have been 10-19 and the first would have been......OH DEAR...ZERO-9....what year is zero? Our western calender splits from BC to AD ( something to do with a carpenter who told people to be nice to each other and got nailed to a tree for his trouble), as follows..... 1BC 1AD therefor all counting begins from 1 ( please remember that the idea of couting from 0 is only common to us because computers do it, back then there was barely a conception of a zero. as follows....... 1st decade... 1AD-10AD 2nd decade 11AD-20AD ....skipping.... 198th decade 1981-1990

Of course the above only applies of you are from a Christian country, if you a follower of the Jewish or Islamic faith, your calender's you own problem :-)

So you can do the "for me the 80's began....." crap all you want, and next time you fall out of a high structure, you can believe the value of gravity to be what you choose as well, you're still gonna go splat.

PS: yes I DID go drinking with the retarded masses on dec31 99, made quite a pain of myself too ( "happy millenium Steve"..."happy 2k you mean, you're a year early"..alll night...to everyone....musta worked, I got laid) , then went out and did it all again for the millenium a year later.

Originally posted by Doctor Clayhead Joy Division has a "genius" frontman who "tragically" topped himself on the "cusp of global superstardom"; New Order were a "faceless" band for much of the 80s who were mostly known for being awkward, moody bastards.Which is the sexier entry in the Tawdry Grand Rawk League?

i like awkward, moody bastards

Except there wasn't a year 1 AD any more than a year zero - it's an arbitrary counting system. So if a bunch of pedants wanted to celebrate the new millennium on 1st Jan 2001 that was up to them but they'd missed the big celebrations by a year whilst attempting to demonstrate to everyone how clever/up their own arses (delete as applicable) they are. Anyway didn't several days get lost when calendars were switched a couple of hundred years ago? Perhaps the 'millennium' celebrations should have been delayed by a few more days because of that?

Originally posted by anita > Originally posted by Doctor Clayhead> Joy Division has a "genius" frontman who "tragically" topped himself on the "cusp of global superstardom"; New Order were a "faceless" band for much of the 80s who were mostly known for being awkward, moody bastards. Which is the sexier entry in the Tawdry Grand Rawk League?

i like awkward, moody bastards

Yer in the right place then, there's enough of 'em round here!

there was an adjustment when the calendar was changed gregorian to julian...or the other way around....one or the other...it's still early for me

Originally posted by Philip Collins Except there wasn't a year 1 AD any more than a year zero - it's an arbitrary counting system. So if a bunch of pedants wanted to celebrate the new millennium on 1st Jan 2001 that was up to them but they'd missed the big celebrations by a year whilst attempting to demonstrate to everyone how clever/up their own arses (delete as applicable) they are.Anyway didn't several days get lost when calendars were switched a couple of hundred years ago? Perhaps the 'millennium' celebrations should have been delayed by a few more days because of that?

All human measures are arbitary, therefor all measures are open to this argument. You;d not like it if I sold you a pint with only 500ml in it would you? Besides, forget the mellenium, the celebrations for the end of the previous century occurred on the correct date, again I say that makes the 20th century only 99 years long. And whereas YOU had one really good party, I had TWO :-)

Originally posted by Steve Campbell > Originally posted by Philip Collins> Except there wasn't a year 1 AD any more than a year zero - it's an arbitrary counting system. So if a bunch of pedants wanted to celebrate the new millennium on 1st Jan 2001 that was up to them but they'd missed the big celebrations by a year whilst attempting to demonstrate to everyone how clever/up their own arses (delete as applicable) they are.> Anyway didn't several days get lost when calendars were switched a couple of hundred years ago? Perhaps the 'millennium' celebrations should have been delayed by a few more days because of that?

All human measures are arbitary, therefor all measures are open to this argument. You;d not like it if I sold you a pint with only 500ml in it would you? Besides, forget the mellenium, the celebrations for the end of the previous century occurred on the correct date, again I say that makes the 20th century only 99 years long. And whereas YOU had one really good party, I had TWO :-) You had a party TWO New Year's Eves running? Wow, that's really living in the fast lane...

Originally posted by five hates six > Originally posted by Ian MadManc> > > > Originally posted by Voice Of Treason .> > One of the people talking about JD said how JDs sound lives on in the sound of New Order.This has been said many times before but its still stated as if its a surprise almost.Its obvious the sound is going to carry on in some way so why is that so strange?>

I suppose because JD had a reputation of making bleak music where as New Order have a reputation for dance music.

Philip - Mathematicaly speaking the 1980' didn't begin until 1981.

C'mon, surely the "80's" began on 1 January 1980

1/1/80 - 31/12/80 = 1980 1/1/81 - 31/12/81 = 1981

and

so

on

think about, in the year 0, people didnt walk around saying, its the year 0? so they started off with 1, being the first year... so it carries on techincally as 1981 being the first year..... BUT i do also have to argue for you. that Techincally speaking, every song made in 1980 wasnt an 80s song.... it wouldnt make sense then that every song that came out in 1980 is not an 80s song, therefore in an 80s club they shouldnt play it. i think thats lame.... i think they should Conisder LWTA an 80s song since it was realeased in that year. so id go with the times and that 1980 was part of the 80s

What and people walked around saying "This is the year 1" did they? It's an arbitrary counting system whereby you can use common sense and say the 80s are the years that have an 8 as the second to last digit or come across like Mr. Logic or that bloke from 'Eggheads'...