Tell us how you really feel

Hooky Spinner Interview

And the happiest moment in Bernard's life, as I recall, musically, was when Gillian left. So he must actually hate me more than he f---ing hates Gillian, because there's the biggest contradiction in terms I've ever seen in me f---ing life! Did Bernard and Gillian differ about musical direction? She's not a very good musician, I'm afraid, and she didn't add that much to the band. It was a problem with both of us. We were very happy when she left.

Holy. Fucking. Shit.

the burly bassist

Did Bernard and Gillian differ about musical direction?

She's not a very good musician, I'm afraid, and she didn't add that much to the band. It was a problem with both of us. We were very happy when she left. And personally I thought New Order Mark 2 were far superior to New Order Mark 1, but that's life, isn't it? Everyone's entitled to their opinion, aren't they?

Aside from the nastiness there, he's basically saying New Order after Gillian left (which produced 2 albums, one of which he hated doing) were better than the New Order before, the one that created all those amazing albums? Come on, Hooky...

this is starting to get interesting...

I don't believe Hooky said any of this. It sounds like a load of bollocks.

Hooky's given too many interviews for this to be a journo reinterpretation. It follows a familiar thread.

I know Bernard might have been a diva at times, but I also think for a lead singer/songwriter he was/is rather gracious. He's never gone off in interviews the way Hooky does. I just can't see him disparaging Gillian's musical ability once they fully got into sequencers, etc. She might not have been a top guitarist, but that didn't stop them.

Tarbox23 wrote: this is starting to get interesting...

I don't know about interesting... Uncomfortable? Downright sad? I mean threatening to fuck people over?

Snorri xxx

Bad Order or New Lieutenant

CLASSIC!!!!

If shes such a shit musician does that mean Steve did the Other Two music entirely by himself? Nah, not buying it.

Particularly nice comments when you bear in mind the reasons Gillian decided she had to leave.

I think this is getting close to loony territory, which is quite sad. Alcoholism is a massive problem, but there's only so much that can be explained by it. I'm thinking these comments constitute an irreversible 'shat in the nest' moment.

I think he is flat out wrong that there is no difference between The Light play nothing-but-JD and a BL set with a few JD tracks.

It is very disappointing and sad. If you are reading this, please stop Hooky.

aysie aysie wrote: Particularly nice comments when you bear in mind the reasons Gillian decided she had to leave.

Well, quite. What a fucking mess. No winners.

aysie aysie wrote: Particularly nice comments when you bear in mind the reasons Gillian decided she had to leave.

Good point.

Waz wrote: Did Bernard and Gillian differ about musical direction?

She's not a very good musician, I'm afraid, and she didn't add that much to the band. It was a problem with both of us. We were very happy when she left. And personally I thought New Order Mark 2 were far superior to New Order Mark 1, but that's life, isn't it? Everyone's entitled to their opinion, aren't they?

---

Aside from the nastiness there, he's basically saying New Order after Gillian left (which produced 2 albums, one of which he hated doing) were better than the New Order before, the one that created all those amazing albums? Come on, Hooky...

.. Is Hooky delusional or getting senile? After each interview I read I can't decide

Well that says it all about the man as far as I am concerned - Bitter, twisted and not prepared to look at things from everyones angle. Re the movement comments, they stole the name back - what a cunt

And by the way - didn't he sneak away the Hacienda trademark claiming no one else was bothered about it?? So he's right - what goes around comes around!

He also need to get his head around the fact that a wider tour will sell out - why - because Bernard wrote the songs and Bernard sings the songs. He mentions New Order with him and not Bernard - is he having a laugh

El Jarvo wrote: what on earth was he thinking here -

"And personally I thought New Order Mark 2 were far superior to New Order Mark 1"

And then he adds that WFTSC (by New Order Mark 2) was shit.

Are we being wound up here?

As I've said on the other side - NO MkIII's only reaction to this is to play What Do You Want From Me in Paris.

Freaking hell... I think he's saying those things on purpose to wind them up, to hurt them the way he feels he's hurt. If not, then I have serious questions...

Come on, Peter, the 1981-1993 years were the best for the band. To deny that is to deny yourself. Making GR and WftSC may have felt more comfortable financially, but...

I agree, though, that recording an album for three years is an excessive indulgence.

oh and btw, New Order II (or is it III?) are coming to the USA!

How taciturn and secretive Bernard & Co are about everything what is going on! Like in those damn early days.

BUT seriously, they need a damn good manager, a psycho able to sort the shit out.

El Jarvo wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: I don't believe Hooky said any of this. It sounds like a load of bollocks.

I know, what on earth was he thinking here -

"And personally I thought New Order Mark 2 were far superior to New Order Mark 1"

If you cut out all the anger he is actually telling the bleeding obvious. Apart from mark 2 being better than mark 1...!

The Paradise Man wrote:

El Jarvo wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: I don't believe Hooky said any of this. It sounds like a load of bollocks.

I know, what on earth was he thinking here -

"And personally I thought New Order Mark 2 were far superior to New Order Mark 1"

If you cut out all the anger he is actually telling the bleeding obvious. Apart from mark 2 being better than mark 1...!

So is it "a load of bollocks" or "actually telling the bleeding obvious" in your eyes?

CTB wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote:

El Jarvo wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: I don't believe Hooky said any of this. It sounds like a load of bollocks.

I know, what on earth was he thinking here -

"And personally I thought New Order Mark 2 were far superior to New Order Mark 1"

If you cut out all the anger he is actually telling the bleeding obvious. Apart from mark 2 being better than mark 1...!

So is it "a load of bollocks" or "actually telling the bleeding obvious" in your eyes?

All will be revealed. This is great, at least we are hearing the truth (the Hooky account) about their working relationship. I can't fooking wait for the book.. Go Hooky go...!

Go Hooky! Keep shitting all over Gillian! Awesome! That bitch totally has it coming!

NotAMod wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote:

CTB wrote: So is it "a load of bollocks" or "actually telling the bleeding obvious" in your eyes?

All will be revealed. This is great, at least we are hearing the truth (the Hooky account) about their working relationship. I can't fooking wait for the book.. Go Hooky go...!

Wow, a big change from:

The Paradise Man wrote: I don't believe Hooky said any of this. It sounds like a load of bollocks.

What changed your mind, Paradise Man? In 12 hours?

Hilarious bloody hilarious.

You plonker. I think the clue was in the words "All will be revealed". The jury is out. Bollocks if it isn't true, but very interesting if it is.

The Paradise Man wrote:

All will be revealed. This is great, at least we are hearing the truth (the Hooky account) about their working relationship. I can't fooking wait for the book.. Go Hooky go...!

I really hope you are being sarcastic.

Wow, I hope he doesn't get a gun and , like , shoot Barney, Steve and Gillian dead .

They continueing is Hooky's greatest concern. I also believe that they're doing it mainly for financial reasons but don't forget that if there's an existent "New Order" around, there will be a lot less people going to Hooky's tribute shows. So he must be deeply worried of his future financial gain too.

Housey wrote:

And the happiest moment in Bernard's life, as I recall, musically, was when Gillian left. So he must actually hate me more than he f---ing hates Gillian, because there's the biggest contradiction in terms I've ever seen in me f---ing life! Did Bernard and Gillian differ about musical direction? She's not a very good musician, I'm afraid, and she didn't add that much to the band. It was a problem with both of us. We were very happy when she left.

Holy. Fucking. Shit.

I don't know much, but at least from what I've heard of about New Order (mind you I'm a younger fan who started listening to them since about 2002) is that the reason for Gillian leaving was for family reasons and not much about having an argument with Steve, Bernard, and Hooky. I've never really encountered anything in interviews and such that gave the impression that Bernard hated Gillian. (That doesn't mean they've never disagreed on anything...but 'hate'?) I'm trying to be fair and polite too. I'm trying to see both POVs...but I just don't understand his POV as reflected in these interviews.

NotAMod wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: This is great, at least we are hearing the truth (the Hooky account) about their working relationship. I can't fooking wait for the book.. Go Hooky go...!

I'd still question your assertion that "this is great" it's all very bitter, negative and the very worst of band relations being aired like dirty laundry over the Internet out of context.

That is unless The Other Three start releasing statements and a full war of words breaks out which would drag everything down even further. The dignity of the situation has long gone. I really miss the silent "hiatus" days of the 90s; everything was far more respectful and ambiguous. None of this "he's a twat, she's talentless, I'm gonna f--- em over..." malarkey.

The situation is the polar opposite of "great" if you're a fan of all four of them.

"Heartbreaking" is a word I've read more than a few times from other fans this morning. I can empathise with that yet here you are on NOOL
exclaiming "Go Hooky go...!"

I just find it amusing that you are hanging off my every word... Feeling with my skin. Come any closer and I'll break your legs.

Hope this is an "old"(gig news still new) interview being aired now for controversy value, but, it's been going this way for weeks now. Lot's of negativity towards Gillian, then Steve, now Barney.

I think he's Hurt(killer 12" and live)the "reunions" gone so well.

edit was gonna add a bit more will hold my tongue and wait.

He justs needs to stop, this is sad. But what it seems to me is that he just gets angrier and angrier that the other three never just acknowledged he was pissed about something. So his anger at that is now worse than the anger he had at the original item. I think if they really did say 'look we know you were pissed, and maybe you were right about some things,-- but you've really been an ass -- but let's put it behind us' he'd really have a picnic at their houses and be as right as rain. BUT, the anger at Gillian is weird - maybe it's because she represents the reason they can still be New Order i.e., if she was in the band and left and they still called themselves NO, why can't they call themselves NO when he's gone?

so so sooo tired of the whole mess to be honest. ive been a fan since the jd days and its never been as bad as this. to be honest i even have to ask myself if i would consider myself a fan anymore, over the years we have had lots and lots of shenanigans with break ups to re-unions and all the crap in between, and with very little to show for it musically, its certainly a more coal than diamonds situation with them nowadays. hopefully if barney, steve and gillian get the us tour of the ground their plane will hit hookys head on, on the way back from a dj spot in the us. at least we wont have to put up with this shite any longer.

They should be selling tickets to the inevitable, frosty reunion in the queue for The Times at WH Smith, Macclesfield, in a few months time. This is sad : what's the point of these interviews? What is Hooky selling, apart from tickets to his gigs?

Why do this to yourselves? Rob G wouldn't stand for this shit.

theWanderer wrote: Hope this is an "old"(gig news still new) interview being aired now for controversy value,

Kind of is, the preface says this interview was before the Toronto show of The Light, which was Sept 24th; around 2 weeks ago. A long way off making much of this excusable, mind you...

The last New Order song was 'Regret.' The rest of them, to me, were electronic songs with bass on them.

I'm pretty sure this should be Electronic with a capital E... and I have to say, I pretty much agree.

Except that Electronic + Hooky's Bass should be better than Electronic alone, but the first Electronic album is a better record than Republic.

The Paradise Man wrote:

NotAMod wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: This is great, at least we are hearing the truth (the Hooky account) about their working relationship. I can't fooking wait for the book.. Go Hooky go...!

I'd still question your assertion that "this is great" it's all very bitter, negative and the very worst of band relations being aired like dirty laundry over the Internet out of context.

That is unless The Other Three start releasing statements and a full war of words breaks out which would drag everything down even further. The dignity of the situation has long gone. I really miss the silent "hiatus" days of the 90s; everything was far more respectful and ambiguous. None of this "he's a twat, she's talentless, I'm gonna f--- em over..." malarkey.

The situation is the polar opposite of "great" if you're a fan of all four of them.

"Heartbreaking" is a word I've read more than a few times from other fans this morning. I can empathise with that yet here you are on NOOL
exclaiming "Go Hooky go...!"

I just find it amusing that you are hanging off my every word... Feeling with my skin. Come any closer and I'll break your legs.

There's a difference between hanging off your words and calling bullshit on them...

Shakin' Baker wrote: BUT, the anger at Gillian is weird - maybe it's because she represents the reason they can still be New Order i.e., if she was in the band and left and they still called themselves NO, why can't they call themselves NO when he's gone?

I absolutely think this is why. It seems to have gotten VERY personal with Hooky with respect to Gillian.

My fan theory, for what it's worth: NO could only be NO with 100% of the four of them in agreement. When she went on her leave of absence, I suspect they agreed that NO could only be NO with 75%, 75% being Barney/Hooky/Steve with Gillian abstaining. Remember, she didn't actually leave, she just went on the leave of absence that gradually became permanent. I suspect she never surrendered her interest, but *may* have promised not to assert it. I also wonder if the agreement wasn't clear as to EXACTLY who the three NO members had to be to comprise the 75%. Given their history of iffy legal decisions, I wouldn't be surprised that they had a poorly-worded agreement.

This explains why, when Hooky left, he was claiming to have 'a third'-- he didn't have 33%, he had a third of a 75%. It also explains why Steve and Barney couldn't continue as New Order, even though they were 2 people to Hooky's 1-- they only had 50% between them.

Enter Gillian. Bam, 75% and New Order is back in business.

So Hooky is furious, because he may have believed (I don't know what was promised) that she wasn't going to assert that interest, and now she has. This would explain all of the "Gillian never did anything useful" talk-- he's making the point in the press that she was NEVER entitled to an equal 25% share in New Order, Inc., and I wouldn't be surprised if his lawyer is now making that point behind the scenes.

Again, I don't know, but this scenario explains a lot, including how B/S/G's moves are legal, yet Hooky could feel that they're dirty.

CTB wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote:

NotAMod wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: This is great, at least we are hearing the truth (the Hooky account) about their working relationship. I can't fooking wait for the book.. Go Hooky go...!

I'd still question your assertion that "this is great" it's all very bitter, negative and the very worst of band relations being aired like dirty laundry over the Internet out of context.

That is unless The Other Three start releasing statements and a full war of words breaks out which would drag everything down even further. The dignity of the situation has long gone. I really miss the silent "hiatus" days of the 90s; everything was far more respectful and ambiguous. None of this "he's a twat, she's talentless, I'm gonna f--- em over..." malarkey.

The situation is the polar opposite of "great" if you're a fan of all four of them.

"Heartbreaking" is a word I've read more than a few times from other fans this morning. I can empathise with that yet here you are on NOOL
exclaiming "Go Hooky go...!"

I just find it amusing that you are hanging off my every word... Feeling with my skin. Come any closer and I'll break your legs.

There's a difference between hanging off your words and calling bullshit on them...

Flies around shit. Prawns around sewers. Yes.

The Paradise Man wrote:

hanging off my every word... Feeling with my skin.

That's a Depeche Mode lyric

The Paradise Man wrote: Flies around shit. Prawns around sewers. Yes.

Although this is all good entertainment could you stop 'quoting' all the posts.

This thread is two pages long already and half of it is you two flirting with each other.

Carry on.

Ger Boy wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote:

hanging off my every word... Feeling with my skin.

That's a Depeche Mode lyric

Well spotted. In your Room.

Keep calm and carry on.

Theres always 2 sides to an arguement and im not gonna bash hooky or barney. its a shame its got so hostile but theyve both got a lot at stake. i guess theyve always had a volatile friendship.

I can imagine barney being quite controlling in a studio environment and has stated numerous times he doesnt like touring, whereas Hooky does.

Chalk n cheese

was thinking the same thing, stop this worrying tend now so we can enjoy the silence.

Oh fuck

El Jarvo wrote: Jezus wept. Has it really come to this ...

... a new low ...

... people quoting Depeche Mode lyrics on a New Order forum.

Well I would use Mark 2 New Order lyrics but coupling 'honey with money' just seemed a little childish.

In declaring that Gillian is not a 'very good musician' is Hooky saying that he in fact is a 'very good musician'? I mean, really...

M1 wrote: In declaring that Gillian is not a 'very good musician' is Hooky saying that he in fact is a 'very good musician'? I mean, really...

None of them could be classed as virtuoso musicians,apart from maybe Steve,we all have the live bootlegs to prove it..

CTB wrote: was thinking the same thing, stop this worrying trend now so we can enjoy the silence.

Its all getting a bit strange, love.

I can't help thinking this is just to help forthcomming book sales and get him invited on chat shows !

El Jarvo wrote:

NO Regret wrote: Theres always 2 sides to an arguement and im not gonna bash hooky or barney. its a shame its got so hostile but theyve both got a lot at stake. i guess theyve always had a volatile friendship.

Where's Barney been hostile then?

We've only been exposed to one side, thus far. Unless I'm missing something?

I didnt say barney had been hostile. I just said its a shame its got so hostile (as in from Hookys statements). Although, I expect Barney has used some choice words in private or directly to Hooky.

Hooky has aired his views whereas Barney has chose not too. Some people have decided to side with one particular party but there is obviously a lot more that isnt known.

Maybe they should do a reality NO Show with all band members to find the truth? Or confront and decay.

Lost. The. Plot.

Yeah, a reality TV show - kind of in the theme of a gameshow but with Keith Allen presenting it!

Call it, Behind Closed Doors.

. . .P O I S O N O U S I N T E N T . . .

Gene wrote:

CTB wrote: was thinking the same thing, stop this worrying trend now so we can enjoy the silence.

Its all getting a bit strange, love.

Be sure to never let me down again.

I think I much more prefer Hooky's bass rather than his mouth ... recently

I'm not making a judgement about who is in the right but...

The longer this goes on, the more I'm inclined to interpret the "New Order" camp's silence as confindence.

In turn, Hooky seems to be lashing out publicly because he has no other recourse.

I jus wish Hooky would shut the f*ck up, go back to doing his own stuff and let new order do theirs. Didn't hear steve/barney ever say thät hooky should be f* cked over because he plays out JD songs. They are smarter then that, live and let live hooky, move on man. U are the one that left NO, so stand by your choice and leave it like that. Twisted bitterness leads to nothing...

Just read Alex's comments on the original link - he says something that's occured to me too. Hooky has been pretty open about when he packed in drinking and it seems to disagree with what he's supposed to have said here. Also agree with Alex that the comments seem well overboard and don't sound like H's inimitable voice at all.

Hooky can say what he wants about who he wants, it's got fuck all to do with me. But it will be interesting to see his response to this, if only to see how accurate it turns out to be.

Housey wrote:

Shakin' Baker wrote: BUT, the anger at Gillian is weird - maybe it's because she represents the reason they can still be New Order i.e., if she was in the band and left and they still called themselves NO, why can't they call themselves NO when he's gone?

I absolutely think this is why. It seems to have gotten VERY personal with Hooky with respect to Gillian.

My fan theory, for what it's worth: NO could only be NO with 100% of the four of them in agreement. When she went on her leave of absence, I suspect they agreed that NO could only be NO with 75%, 75% being Barney/Hooky/Steve with Gillian abstaining. Remember, she didn't actually leave, she just went on the leave of absence that gradually became permanent. I suspect she never surrendered her interest, but *may* have promised not to assert it. I also wonder if the agreement wasn't clear as to EXACTLY who the three NO members had to be to comprise the 75%. Given their history of iffy legal decisions, I wouldn't be surprised that they had a poorly-worded agreement.

This explains why, when Hooky left, he was claiming to have 'a third'-- he didn't have 33%, he had a third of a 75%. It also explains why Steve and Barney couldn't continue as New Order, even though they were 2 people to Hooky's 1-- they only had 50% between them.

Enter Gillian. Bam, 75% and New Order is back in business.

So Hooky is furious, because he may have believed (I don't know what was promised) that she wasn't going to assert that interest, and now she has. This would explain all of the "Gillian never did anything useful" talk-- he's making the point in the press that she was NEVER entitled to an equal 25% share in New Order, Inc., and I wouldn't be surprised if his lawyer is now making that point behind the scenes.

Again, I don't know, but this scenario explains a lot, including how B/S/G's moves are legal, yet Hooky could feel that they're dirty.

Concur.

"...but they're doing it for financial reasons mainly."

Terrible when musicians do this sort of thing...

Snorri xxx

cranelane wrote:

M1 wrote: In declaring that Gillian is not a 'very good musician' is Hooky saying that he in fact is a 'very good musician'? I mean, really...

None of them could be classed as virtuoso musicians,apart from maybe Steve,we all have the live bootlegs to prove it..

Always made New Order live exciting, you never knew what you were going to get. Different sets, out of tune guitars, equipment stopping half way through a song, wrong tempo. That all made New Order, New Order, was, and still is really appealing to me.

Waz wrote:

.. Is Hooky delusional or getting senile? After each interview I read I can't decide

somebody give him a DRINK!

The Paradise Man wrote:

Gene wrote:

CTB wrote: was thinking the same thing, stop this worrying trend now so we can enjoy the silence.

Its all getting a bit strange, love.

Be sure to never let me down again.

Bernard, Hooky loves to hate you.

Oh, hang on, thats Erasure.

Ive plumbed new depths............

Gene wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote:

Gene wrote:

CTB wrote: was thinking the same thing, stop this worrying trend now so we can enjoy the silence.

Its all getting a bit strange, love.

Be sure to never let me down again.

Bernard, Hooky loves to hate you.

Oh, hang on, thats Erasure.

Ive plumbed new depths............

Hooky is just showing the other side of love. Ooops that's Yazoo.

BillONdollar wrote:

Waz wrote:

.. Is Hooky delusional or getting senile? After each interview I read I can't decide

somebody give him a DRINK!

Spot on. This is what happens when people buy into that vapid 12-steps horseshit.

Gnu Odor wrote:

The last New Order song was 'Regret.' The rest of them, to me, were electronic songs with bass on them.

I'm pretty sure this should be Electronic with a capital E... and I have to say, I pretty much agree.

Except that Electronic + Hooky's Bass should be better than Electronic alone, but the first Electronic album is a better record than Republic.

A lot of the songs made after 2001 were more rock/pop sounding..not so much dance. A lot of the more dancier(?) songs Bernard's made seems to be with Electronic (especially during their first two albums) and with collaborations (with Chemical Brothers, Blank and Jones, Hot Chip & Hot City...). There were some dance influenced New Order songs after 2001, but it was mainly songs like 'Here to Stay', 'GIAUE', and maybe 'Behind Closed Doors'. Most of the songs on 'Get Ready' and 'WFTSC' were not as dance/electronic influenced.

leather_girl wrote:

Gnu Odor wrote:

The last New Order song was 'Regret.' The rest of them, to me, were electronic songs with bass on them.

I'm pretty sure this should be Electronic with a capital E... and I have to say, I pretty much agree.

Except that Electronic + Hooky's Bass should be better than Electronic alone, but the first Electronic album is a better record than Republic.

A lot of the songs made after 2001 were more rock/pop sounding..not so much dance. A lot of the more dancier(?) songs Bernard's made seems to be with Electronic (especially during their first two albums) and with collaborations (with Chemical Brothers, Blank and Jones, Hot Chip & Hot City...). There were some dance influenced New Order songs after 2001, but it was mainly songs like 'Here to Stay', 'GIAUE', and maybe 'Behind Closed Doors'. Most of the songs on 'Get Ready' and 'WFTSC' were not as dance/electronic influenced.

What I think Hooky was trying to say is that the album Republic could have been released as the second Electronic album, apart from the single "Regret". A bit of an exaggeration, but the middle of Republic does seem like a Bernard solo album with session musicians. Hopefully Marr would have had better taste.

0_o wrote:

leather_girl wrote:

Gnu Odor wrote:

The last New Order song was 'Regret.' The rest of them, to me, were electronic songs with bass on them.

I'm pretty sure this should be Electronic with a capital E... and I have to say, I pretty much agree.

Except that Electronic + Hooky's Bass should be better than Electronic alone, but the first Electronic album is a better record than Republic.

A lot of the songs made after 2001 were more rock/pop sounding..not so much dance. A lot of the more dancier(?) songs Bernard's made seems to be with Electronic (especially during their first two albums) and with collaborations (with Chemical Brothers, Blank and Jones, Hot Chip & Hot City...). There were some dance influenced New Order songs after 2001, but it was mainly songs like 'Here to Stay', 'GIAUE', and maybe 'Behind Closed Doors'. Most of the songs on 'Get Ready' and 'WFTSC' were not as dance/electronic influenced.

What I think Hooky was trying to say that the album Republic could have been released as the second Electronic album, apart from the single "Regret". A bit of an exaggeration, but the middle of Republic does seem like a Berard solo album with session musicians. Hopefully Marr would have had better taste.

All right, I can accept that.

Clayhead Liberation Faction wrote: Spot on. This is what happens when people buy into that vapid 12-steps horseshit.

My experience is that people in recovery tend to turn on their friends, especially if those friends are still enjoying their beverages. I wonder if it's a self-preservation move, get yourself away from...

(wait for it)

...temptation.

The arguments between Barney and Hooky I can kind of understand. They are both blokes with very strong opinions and have personalities that appear predisposed to standing their ground in an argument. In a way I am surprised they lasted as long as they did (I suppose Gretton kept them in check).

However, I cannot understand Hooky's argument with Gillian. Gillian (like Steve) appears to have a very pleasant personality. In interview Gillian comes over as a very sweet person - unlikely to argue the toss or be stroppy. It is all very strange. If I was Steve (as Gillian's husband) I would be looking to plant one on Hooky for what he has said. It seems like in one move Hooky has alienated himself from the whole band and a lot of their fans.

The picture at the top while I was reading all this was of Hooky pointing his finger at the rest of the band.

Adam Tate wrote: If I was Steve (as Gillian's husband) I would be looking to plant one on Hooky for what he has said.

Yep

johnny wrote:

Adam Tate wrote: If I was Steve (as Gillian's husband) I would be looking to plant one on Hooky for what he has said.

Yep

I also don't understand how Hooky claims that they (even Bernard and Steve) 'hated' Gillian.

leather_girl wrote:

I also don't understand how Hooky claims that they (even Bernard and Steve) 'hated' Gillian.

I presume he is trying to destabilise the group from the outside, The question is would it have been better to have him inside the tent pissing out,than outside the tent pissing in.

Housey wrote:

Clayhead Liberation Faction wrote: Spot on. This is what happens when people buy into that vapid 12-steps horseshit.

My experience is that people in recovery tend to turn on their friends, especially if those friends are still enjoying their beverages. I wonder if it's a self-preservation move, get yourself away from...

(wait for it)

...temptation.

You might be right. However, I was thinking more along the lines that someone needs to take him down the pub, buy him a beer and explain to him that he needs to stop acting like a total fucking cunt.

Oh absolutely. That or a slap upside the head.

I think Hooky-- in his mind-- isn't insulting Gillian personally. He did say in another interview that she was awesome for putting up with them. I think he may even like her. He's just saying he thinks she's a terrible musician.

The problem is, that's her job and there really isn't any way you can denigrate the way she does her job without it being personal, especially since he's not her boss. Your employer can say that you're shit at your job without it being personal, but not your co-worker.

Housey wrote: Oh absolutely. That or a slap upside the head.

I think Hooky-- in his mind-- isn't insulting Gillian personally. He did say in another interview that she was awesome for putting up with them. I think he may even like her. He's just saying he thinks she's a terrible musician.

The problem is, that's her job and there really isn't any way you can denigrate the way she does her job without it being personal, especially since he's not her boss. Your employer can say that you're shit at your job without it being personal, but not your co-worker.

Yes, Hooky is doing himself no favours by being so personally disrespectful to Gillian. He seems to be bitter that Gillian was just brought in (in his opinion) to help legally take away Hooky's say in New Order Inc. corporation, so Bernard could profit from using the New Order name. I suppose Hooky thinks Gillian should have stayed out of the argument between him and Bernard. Gillian and Steve are allowed to do what they like. While I'm sure Steve and Bernard are mad that Hooky has been profiting from exploiting Joy Division, so they consider it fair play. A lot of bitterness and hatred here, for years from both Hooky and Bernard. Just hope that Hooky doesn't try to actually use the band name Joy Division himself just to get revenge.

You only have to watch the neworderstory to see how the relationship between Hooky and Bernard had broken down by the early nineties, if not before.

Hooky frequently looks to camera and interviewers/producers when Bernard is talking (often hijacking the conversation) as if to say 'here we go again'. Check the interviews around the table at the Montreaux Jazz Festival. In one particular soundbite Bernard tells Hooky to 'shut up'.

They hate each other big time. Clash of personalities, clash of interests, clash of aspirations for the future.

As for Gillian, I think Hooky is telling it like it was/is, but I don't think he has set out to be personal for personals sake.

How anyone can sit here and defend Hooky after the atrocious, completely sexist shit he had said about Gillian is beyond me.

Hooky quit New Order. If the others member of New Order wish to continue making music together, that is their right, just as it's Hooky's right to go tour JD albums with his mates.

Simple as that really. If Hooky still wanted to be in New Order, he should have spoken with the diplomatically and worked out their issues together.

It's a funny thing...Hooky seems to think Bernard is a tyrant, but everyone else seems to get along and enjoy playing with him just fine.

Regardless, there is nothing to defend the shit he is saying about Gillian. She left New Order because one of her children was sick and she was diagnosed with breast cancer. I highly doubt that was the musical high point of Bernard's creative life, as Hooky stated.

The Paradise Man wrote: Hooky frequently looks to camera and interviewers/producers when Bernard is talking (often hijacking the conversation) as if to say 'here we go again'.

Yeah, I noticed this too. Also "I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one, Steve."

On another note, I think it would serve Hooky well to remember that Gillian's joining New Order was, um, ROB GRETTON's idea.

Housey wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: Hooky frequently looks to camera and interviewers/producers when Bernard is talking (often hijacking the conversation) as if to say 'here we go again'.

Yeah, I noticed this too. Also "I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one, Steve."

On another note, I think it would serve Hooky well to remember that Gillian's joining New Order was, um, ROB GRETTON's idea.

Loved the bit where Bernard chokes on his wine and says "to be fair to us, to be fair to us...'

There was a lot of tension in the room in the 'In Conversation' interview featured on the 316 DVD. Noticed Steve and Gillian looking uncomfortable too. To be fair to Bernard he is the leader of the band just by being the lead singer.

Zachery Starkey wrote:

It's a funny thing...Hooky seems to think Bernard is a tyrant, but everyone else seems to get along and enjoy playing with him just fine.

Spot on

Skullcrushed wrote:

Zachery Starkey wrote:

It's a funny thing...Hooky seems to think Bernard is a tyrant, but everyone else seems to get along and enjoy playing with him just fine.

Spot on

Yes but maybe they prefer to be more in the background and go with the flow. Did hooky actually say these remarks? Is it misquotes or ficticious? I dunno. I expect the rest of NO to have made a return statement if it were true. I can't beleve they wouldnt respond as it's pretty damning.

NO Regret wrote:

Skullcrushed wrote:

Zachery Starkey wrote:

It's a funny thing...Hooky seems to think Bernard is a tyrant, but everyone else seems to get along and enjoy playing with him just fine.

Spot on

Yes but maybe they prefer to be more in the background and go with the flow. Did hooky actually say these remarks? Is it misquotes or ficticious? I dunno. I expect the rest of NO to have made a return statement if it were true. I can't beleve they wouldnt respond as it's pretty damning.

Perhaps the rest of them have heard of the term 'dignified silence' before.

Not to defend Hooky here, but from what I've read all these years, I've got the perception that Bernard is a control freak, i.e. either his way or no way. And it's hard to work with people with such an attitude. That is what was happening with the Beatles in 1968-69, basically Macca being a cunt.

And writing songs on computer hardly involves people like bassists, drummers and guitarists. That notion prompted Bernard to form Electronic...

Anyway, I wish Hooky would just let it go. Let fans decide, whether they'll like New Order Mark III, or not. He'll forever be the part of the best New Order music, anyway. I'd love to see him write books, tour and record a new material like he did in Monaco. If a miracle happens and he joins New Order - fantastic, if not, well, Hooky has proved to be a great musician on his own, anyway.

This really is getting tedious now. Just where is it going to stop?

One could just conclude that the only cement that bind the members of New Order was Rob Gretton. I don't think that any member of their entourage may replace him. Tony Wilson would have been my first choice though.

End of neworderstory.

NO Regret wrote:

Skullcrushed wrote:

Zachery Starkey wrote:

It's a funny thing...Hooky seems to think Bernard is a tyrant, but everyone else seems to get along and enjoy playing with him just fine.

Spot on

Yes but maybe they prefer to be more in the background and go with the flow. Did hooky actually say these remarks? Is it misquotes or ficticious? I dunno. I expect the rest of NO to have made a return statement if it were true. I can't beleve they wouldnt respond as it's pretty damning.

They don't necessarily read it instantly, and have a history of not responding. Quite right in my book, as should happen in a band that were HUGE back in the eighties and nineties. Actions speak louder than words, and as i said some weeks ago, Hooky needs to put his hand in his short pockets and employ someone to deal with the press. This stuff costs him loads everyday.

Burt Burterson wrote: Actions speak louder than words, and as i said some weeks ago, Hooky needs to put his hand in his short pockets and employ someone to deal with the press. This stuff costs him loads everyday.

Hooky now manages himself. He's been through twelve managers since the split. So I don't think he'll be hiring anyone any time soon.

Skullcrushed wrote:

Burt Burterson wrote: Actions speak louder than words, and as i said some weeks ago, Hooky needs to put his hand in his short pockets and employ someone to deal with the press. This stuff costs him loads everyday.

Hooky now manages himself. He's been through twelve managers since the split. So I don't think he'll be hiring anyone any time soon.

12？Is that true？

The Paradise Man wrote:

Housey wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: Hooky frequently looks to camera and interviewers/producers when Bernard is talking (often hijacking the conversation) as if to say 'here we go again'.

Yeah, I noticed this too. Also "I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one, Steve."

On another note, I think it would serve Hooky well to remember that Gillian's joining New Order was, um, ROB GRETTON's idea.

Loved the bit where Bernard chokes on his wine and says "to be fair to us, to be fair to us...'

There was a lot of tension in the room in the 'In Conversation' interview featured on the 316 DVD. Noticed Steve and Gillian looking uncomfortable too. To be fair to Bernard he is the leader of the band just by being the lead singer.

That's the problem with lead singers, they automatically think they are the leader of the band!

condemnation wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote:

Housey wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: Hooky frequently looks to camera and interviewers/producers when Bernard is talking (often hijacking the conversation) as if to say 'here we go again'.

Yeah, I noticed this too. Also "I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one, Steve."

On another note, I think it would serve Hooky well to remember that Gillian's joining New Order was, um, ROB GRETTON's idea.

Loved the bit where Bernard chokes on his wine and says "to be fair to us, to be fair to us...'

There was a lot of tension in the room in the 'In Conversation' interview featured on the 316 DVD. Noticed Steve and Gillian looking uncomfortable too. To be fair to Bernard he is the leader of the band just by being the lead singer.

That's the problem with lead singers, they automatically think they are the leader of the band!

I dunno about tense, I thought they were all quite relaxed and jovial in the sitting down, chatting, drinking wine part. But i noticed barney likes to take over conversations and only believe his version of events.

This forum is increasingly filled with Belieber-alikes, only instead of pubeless pre-teen girls it's all autistic 40-something baldies with erectile dysfunction.

FFS.

Clayhead Liberation Faction wrote: This forum is increasingly filled with Belieber-alikes, only instead of pubeless pre-teen girls it's all autistic 40-something baldies with erectile dysfunction.

FFS.

Clayhead Liberation Faction wrote: This forum is increasingly filled with Belieber-alikes, only instead of pubeless pre-teen girls it's all autistic 40-something baldies with erectile dysfunction.

FFS.

Dont look at me, Im as stiff as a board.

Clayhead Liberation Faction wrote: This forum is increasingly filled with Belieber-alikes, only instead of pubeless pre-teen girls it's all autistic 40-something baldies with erectile dysfunction.

FFS.

Erectile dysfunction?

Chronic masturbators

Skullcrushed wrote: He's been through twelve managers since the split. So I don't think he'll be hiring anyone any time soon.

that is utter, utter rubbish.

[orange]Jack[/orange] wrote:

Skullcrushed wrote: He's been through twelve managers since the split. So I don't think he'll be hiring anyone any time soon.

that is utter, utter rubbish.

Jack, while you are here, can you verify the interview in question is bona fide? Seems some folks think its bollocks...

Just seen the following on this site:

"Heard from a very good source last night at the Jez Kerr gig in Glsagow, that New Order are planning more live dates. London was mentioned as a defo go'er." I presume that answers the question of two charity gigs. Also noticed in the int at the top of this thread that "Spinner" also mention a tweet that infers that Hook's previous band was BL. Inncauracies like that, coupled with the name "Spinner" and that Mr. Hook may well not get on with the Other Three, but I've never seen him being downright nasty to them would suggest that the interview may well be either made up or grossly exaggerated. I'll sit on the fence though. I might end up with splinters, but it's better than the pain of seeing my favourite band disintegrating in animosity.

Fucking. hell

What a twat

So much worse than Mani/twatter thing, at least he was of his face

Anyone doing the London dates?

Geno wrote: Fucking. hell

What a twat

So much worse than Mani/twatter thing, at least he was of his face

Anyone doing the London dates?

what dates?

Right, thats me out. You can do whatever you want now Mr Hook, I am simply not interested in someone who consistantly acts like an utter cunt.

I've never taken a position on the whole Hook vs The Rest bollocks but enough is enough. Go fuck yourself.

M1 wrote: In declaring that Gillian is not a 'very good musician' is Hooky saying that he in fact is a 'very good musician'? I mean, really...

i remember the days when the whole point of going to a New Order show was to see just how bad they can mess up their own songs. it was fun and interesting at the same time. my favourite years of NO are 1983-89. everything else was also good, but not as good.

i don't like the idea of Barney and Steve touring as NO without Hooky, but oh well. the days of me making an effort to see a NO show have been long gone.

Having seen Hooky in the US now (I liked the show), I am waiting for the for the rest of NO to get "balls and ass" over here for a good comparison...

jake atkinson wrote: Right, thats me out. You can do whatever you want now Mr Hook, I am simply not interested in someone who consistantly acts like an utter cunt.

I've never taken a position on the whole Hook vs The Rest bollocks but enough is enough. Go fuck yourself.

Nice. Hung drawn and quartered. I'm sure the Hookster won't lose any sleep over this mind you.

This is interesting...

New Order Limited Formed - 4th April 2011

Shareholders

Bernard Sumner, Stephen Paul David Morris and Gillian Lesley Morris.

Shares issued - 28th July 2011

This seems new: no doubt he's not happy with the other three (apologies if someone's brought this up in the thread and I missed it)

"It's the same thing with New Order deciding to tour without me. It makes me all the more determined to fuck New Order over in any possible way I can. If they think I'm just going to scuttle off to a cabin in the woods, they've got another thing coming. They're dickheads. People go and hide, but I don't. I'm a fighter. I'm going to come out fighting."

From NME http://www.nme.com/news/new-order/59659

El Jarvo wrote:

Simon Simpson wrote: This is interesting...

New Order Limited Formed - 4th April 2011

Shareholders

Bernard Sumner, Stephen Paul David Morris and Gillian Lesley Morris.

Shares issued - 28th July 2011

Where's that from then?

Maybe they should call the new band that? New Order Ltd.

If you form a limited company the details are widely available through Business Credit Check subscription sites. Was checking a potential customer and searched.

El Jarvo wrote:

Simon Simpson wrote: This is interesting...

New Order Limited Formed - 4th April 2011

Shareholders

Bernard Sumner, Stephen Paul David Morris and Gillian Lesley Morris.

Shares issued - 28th July 2011

Where's that from then?

Maybe they should call the new band that? New Order Ltd.

Always thought Public Image Ltd was a great band name, this wouldn't be far off, haha.

El Jarvo wrote:

Zachery Starkey wrote: Always thought Public Image Ltd was a great band name, this wouldn't be far off, haha.

Without Hooky's bass-playing, maybe they should just make do with Limited Order?

Haha, touche!

Simon Simpson wrote: This is interesting...

New Order Limited Formed - 4th April 2011

Shareholders

Bernard Sumner, Stephen Paul David Morris and Gillian Lesley Morris.

Shares issued - 28th July 2011

Hmmm. Interesting.

Reminds me of my old Substance poster from 1987 that had in teeny letters in the corner "copyright 1987 by New Order, Inc." When I noticed it, it was like I was immediately disabused of any romantic punk ideals I had. "OH MY GOD, THEY'RE A COMPANY?!"

you shouldnt criticise a fellow musicians playing in public hooky, especially when you come from an ethos of doing things yourself and learning to play from scratch. its not a particularly classy thing to do.

People say bernard sumner is a control freak? There is nothing wrong with that in a group when your control freak is largely responsible for writing hit records. Generally in a band if you have a situation of someone being pissed all the time, not rehearsing or contributing little or nothing to the group someone has to take matters by the scruff of the neck and produce something or the whole thing falls apart. Bands have to be all equally focused to be successful.

as well as that within a group you will have someone who is content to do the same type of song over and over and over again ,and while that sort of self indulgence would appeal to some of the audience who like that type of song it is taking all the fun out of the creative process of writing the music, why most musicians picked up an instrument in the first place.

hooky has nothing to prove with the work he has put in all his career but he should have a bit of dignity now and enjoy his success.

Housey wrote:

Simon Simpson wrote: This is interesting...

New Order Limited Formed - 4th April 2011

Shareholders

Bernard Sumner, Stephen Paul David Morris and Gillian Lesley Morris.

Shares issued - 28th July 2011

Hmmm. Interesting.

Reminds me of my old Substance poster from 1987 that had in teeny letters in the corner "copyright 1987 by New Order, Inc." When I noticed it, it was like I was immediately disabused of any romantic punk ideals I had. "OH MY GOD, THEY'RE A COMPANY?!"

There have been several over the years. Always remember Gain West plastered on the Hac.

Simon Simpson wrote: This is interesting...

New Order Limited Formed - 4th April 2011

Shareholders

Bernard Sumner, Stephen Paul David Morris and Gillian Lesley Morris.

Shares issued - 28th July 2011

Interesting info...

One thing I don't get is how Hooky donesn't understand that with all this malice he's precisely playing into the other three's hands, now even provided half he'd said is right noone is going to side with him anymore ? Another thing, how comes Barney's apparently become a workaholic and decided he wants to tour now after all these years? Spite, lack of Hooky in the band, what ?

Johnny Giles wrote:

effect return wrote: you shouldnt criticise a fellow musicians playing in public hooky, especially when you come from an ethos of doing things yourself and learning to play from scratch. its not a particularly classy thing to do.

People say bernard sumner is a control freak? There is nothing wrong with that in a group when your control freak is largely responsible for writing hit records. Generally in a band if you have a situation of someone being pissed all the time, not rehearsing or contributing little or nothing to the group someone has to take matters by the scruff of the neck and produce something or the whole thing falls apart. Bands have to be all equally focused to be successful.

as well as that within a group you will have someone who is content to do the same type of song over and over and over again ,and while that sort of self indulgence would appeal to some of the audience who like that type of song it is taking all the fun out of the creative process of writing the music, why most musicians picked up an instrument in the first place.

hooky has nothing to prove with the work he has put in all his career but he should have a bit of dignity now and enjoy his success.

Nicely put. Great to see some sanity on here. You should post more often, this place benefits from informed opinions.

I agree. And I don't want to hear the same type of song over and over. The classic songs (the ones already recorded and played again and again) I'll always enjoy, but it's BORING to hear "new songs" that ape that formula from before. When you get older, naturally you may start to take less chances, experiment less, than you did in your youth. But I think New Order still has a lot more experimentation left in them, and I really want to hear that. I want to hear risks being taken. I don't want to hear the same bass guitar line over and over again. It was great then, and it was done well then, but please advance the page.

Eric Wang wrote:

Johnny Giles wrote:

effect return wrote: you shouldnt criticise a fellow musicians playing in public hooky, especially when you come from an ethos of doing things yourself and learning to play from scratch. its not a particularly classy thing to do.

People say bernard sumner is a control freak? There is nothing wrong with that in a group when your control freak is largely responsible for writing hit records. Generally in a band if you have a situation of someone being pissed all the time, not rehearsing or contributing little or nothing to the group someone has to take matters by the scruff of the neck and produce something or the whole thing falls apart. Bands have to be all equally focused to be successful.

as well as that within a group you will have someone who is content to do the same type of song over and over and over again ,and while that sort of self indulgence would appeal to some of the audience who like that type of song it is taking all the fun out of the creative process of writing the music, why most musicians picked up an instrument in the first place.

hooky has nothing to prove with the work he has put in all his career but he should have a bit of dignity now and enjoy his success.

Nicely put. Great to see some sanity on here. You should post more often, this place benefits from informed opinions.

I agree. And I don't want to hear the same type of song over and over. The classic songs (the ones already recorded and played again and again) I'll always enjoy, but it's BORING to hear "new songs" that ape that formula from before. When you get older, naturally you may start to take less chances, experiment less, than you did in your youth. But I think New Order still has a lot more experimentation left in them, and I really want to hear that. I want to hear risks being taken. I don't want to hear the same bass guitar line over and over again. It was great then, and it was done well then, but please advance the page.

Agreed.

That dancey track that the Other Wto did recently was excellent....if New Order were to make a heavy Electro/Dance record....I'd be pretty happy with that.

Johnny Giles wrote:

effect return wrote: you shouldnt criticise a fellow musicians playing in public hooky, especially when you come from an ethos of doing things yourself and learning to play from scratch. its not a particularly classy thing to do.

People say bernard sumner is a control freak? There is nothing wrong with that in a group when your control freak is largely responsible for writing hit records. Generally in a band if you have a situation of someone being pissed all the time, not rehearsing or contributing little or nothing to the group someone has to take matters by the scruff of the neck and produce something or the whole thing falls apart. Bands have to be all equally focused to be successful.

as well as that within a group you will have someone who is content to do the same type of song over and over and over again ,and while that sort of self indulgence would appeal to some of the audience who like that type of song it is taking all the fun out of the creative process of writing the music, why most musicians picked up an instrument in the first place.

hooky has nothing to prove with the work he has put in all his career but he should have a bit of dignity now and enjoy his success.

Nicely put. Great to see some sanity on here. You should post more often, this place benefits from informed opinions.

Thanks but i dont know if im informed to any great degree. Musicians act like pricks a lot of the time (im a guitarist by the way) which is part and parcel of music for whatever reason. I was lucky that i met a very talented old guitarist when i started out ( he had some chart hits in the late 60's,played with hendrix etc) and he explained that musicians should never criticize the playing of someone else and that stood me in good stead when i started to get better, To enjoy the fact that now i can play better and to concentrate on your own thing and style.

Getting back on topic, the thing that stood new order out from other groups that did electronic music (howard jones,kajagoogoo and simple minds etc) was that new order had class and were always for doing something new and different which is why as i said before that people take up instruments and respect pioneering bands like new order

The class that they have or which hooky seems to be slowly giving up is what allows them to keep playing for so long and hooky should realise this before he accepts the call for an 80's revival tour with men at work and adam ant.

Zachery Starkey wrote:

Eric Wang wrote:

Johnny Giles wrote:

effect return wrote: you shouldnt criticise a fellow musicians playing in public hooky, especially when you come from an ethos of doing things yourself and learning to play from scratch. its not a particularly classy thing to do.

People say bernard sumner is a control freak? There is nothing wrong with that in a group when your control freak is largely responsible for writing hit records. Generally in a band if you have a situation of someone being pissed all the time, not rehearsing or contributing little or nothing to the group someone has to take matters by the scruff of the neck and produce something or the whole thing falls apart. Bands have to be all equally focused to be successful.

as well as that within a group you will have someone who is content to do the same type of song over and over and over again ,and while that sort of self indulgence would appeal to some of the audience who like that type of song it is taking all the fun out of the creative process of writing the music, why most musicians picked up an instrument in the first place.

hooky has nothing to prove with the work he has put in all his career but he should have a bit of dignity now and enjoy his success.

Nicely put. Great to see some sanity on here. You should post more often, this place benefits from informed opinions.

I agree. And I don't want to hear the same type of song over and over. The classic songs (the ones already recorded and played again and again) I'll always enjoy, but it's BORING to hear "new songs" that ape that formula from before. When you get older, naturally you may start to take less chances, experiment less, than you did in your youth. But I think New Order still has a lot more experimentation left in them, and I really want to hear that. I want to hear risks being taken. I don't want to hear the same bass guitar line over and over again. It was great then, and it was done well then, but please advance the page.

Agreed.

That dancey track that the Other Wto did recently was excellent....if New Order were to make a heavy Electro/Dance record....I'd be pretty happy with that.

Id say its a possibility they will release electro/dance stuff with someone else or possibly under a different name. Its been a while since new order/bad lieutenant have done anything dancey and maybe they feel that people will doubt their credibility writing dance music in their 50's