Question about the latest Hooky book and thing he says about Steve

Rereading his book before I read Steve's book. And noticed a part during the Movement era section that I didnt notice during my first read, where he brings up an event where they're all drunk and at the hotel and Steve gets drunk and supposedly imitates some "black dude, geezer from the bronx..I'm a pimp!" When drunk. What's hooky trying to insinuate here? Or Steve imitates someone in particular? It seems rather outta context then in next page kinda throws a nasty shot at Gillian. So I feel like hes trying to start crap about them. Or taking stuff out of context. Unless theres actually more to it and hes imitating some movie or whatever? Havent read Steve's book yet, so wondering if he references it? Steve seems the absolute least one who would ever be in any way racist or anything like that. Steve and Gillian are like the redeeming characters of the band.. so. Hes definitely not, right??

Anyone shed any light on this? And yeah, the whole stupid fascist/racist rumours have always bothered me so I'd hate to imagine this.

Send me a PM if anyone doesnt wanna discuss on here. Since any hooky subject seems to be of edge still. Etc.

Uploaded the snippet from the book where it comes up: http://ibb.co/PGTSLhf

People do stupid things when they're young and drunk. It doesn't mean he's racist.

Odds on Hook trying to stir the shit, because he literally has nothing to offer anymore. Bitter old man.

Yep - agreed. People do lots of daft things when they're young and/or drunk.

The early accusations of 'far right' tendencies of the group never really amounted to anything. Again, daftness of youth / naivety etc. Apart from a few 'interesting' choices for band names, not much else holds any water when looking for examples of fascism / racism.

As regards why Hooky mentioned this, I'm not really sure he's trying to stir things up, particularly (well, no more than just spicing up his book with some interesting anecdotes). He's said far(!) worse things about the band, IMO. If there was anything more to the incident, I'm sure he'd have let us know.

What is interesting, is his following quote about Gillian's doe-eyes / fluttering her eyelashes etc. He makes a couple of other positive comments about her appearance in the book (not much else he's nice about, sadly). Maybe it wasn't just Rob (and me!) who had a crush on her. Just saying... ;-)

perspexorange wrote: Yep - agreed. People do lots of daft things when they're young and/or drunk.

The early accusations of 'far right' tendencies of the group never really amounted to anything. Again, daftness of youth / naivety etc. Apart from a few 'interesting' choices for band names, not much else holds any water when looking for examples of fascism / racism.

As regards why Hooky mentioned this, I'm not really sure he's trying to stir things up, particularly (well, no more than just spicing up his book with some interesting anecdotes). He's said far(!) worse things about the band, IMO. If there was anything more to the incident, I'm sure he'd have let us know.

What is interesting, is his following quote about Gillian's doe-eyes / fluttering her eyelashes etc. He makes a couple of other positive comments about her appearance in the book (not much else he's nice about, sadly). Maybe it wasn't just Rob (and me!) who had a crush on her. Just saying... ;-)

Haha!!!!! I never thought about that!! Maybe hooky have crush on her. Omg lol. THAT would explain A LOT actually. Now that I think of it.

Hell hath no fury like a Hooky scorned!

perspexorange wrote: Hell hath no fury like a Hooky scorned!

😂 😂

lentils wrote: Ok so... Steve is definitely not racist then?

I don't believe anyone but Steve can answer that.

I also don't believe he is.

lentils wrote: In the Unknown Pleasures JD hooky book..he swears they werent nazis tho..but just obsessed with the war. I always did wonder about Ian, tho.

Even when I was a kid (and I'm 16 years younger than Barney / Hooky), everyone was interested in the War.

We used to play 'War' on the playground when we were 8 years old (much like my Dad's generation played 'Cowboys and Indians'). There were War films on TV every week in the 70s. I even had a German stormtrooper Action Man, complete with stalk hand-grenades, round helmet, sidecar etc. (I also had a few British 'Tommy' Action Men too, to put things in perspective).

The point being, there was so much interest in the War around that time, you kind of couldn't escape it. Sumner and Hook's generation would've grown up with fathers and mothers that vividly remembered the War; not necessarily doing service, but having to live through it.

Something as monumental as WWII, so close in living memory, was bound to be of interest to young men growing up in the 60s / 70s.

Couple that with 'Punk' and the want to rebel / shock, and it's no wonder that quite a few bands dubiously flirted a little with 'choice' imagery. What better way to get up the adult generations' noses than to be seen to be 'supporting' ideals that their parents fought against?

As regards Ian, it's been 25 years since I read Debbie's book. I think there was some reference to one or two incidents, but nothing really sticks in my brain. If he was a massive racist, I think that would've been the image I took away after reading the book, which I didn't (at the time).

But, as I said, I really can't remember the incidents in question, so they were probably just 'slightly unsavoury' occurrences rather than something atrocious. It's also only Ms Curtis' word to go on though. I'm not saying that she would lie about things, but things get misremembered all the time by people.

The other thing to bear in mind is how attitudes change over the years. I'm not wanting to defend any sort of racism, but you have to remember that casual racism proliferated society in the 70s. TV programmes like 'The Black & White Minstrel Show', 'Love Thy Neighbour', 'It Ain't Half Hot, Mum' etc. were on telly a lot.

It would be 'easier' for someone in the 70s to slip into saying something that we would find abhorrent by today's standards. Especially when people were being 'influenced' by the programmes listed above (among others) to find racism 'funny'.

Anyway, heavy stuff to be talking about on an internet forum.

You watch, now that I've 'kind of' defended Ian, someone's going to quote one of the things mentioned in Ms Curtis's book that I couldn't remember, and I'm going to find myself horrified at myself...

perspexorange wrote:

lentils wrote: In the Unknown Pleasures JD hooky book..he swears they werent nazis tho..but just obsessed with the war. I always did wonder about Ian, tho.

Even when I was a kid (and I'm 16 years younger than Barney / Hooky), everyone was interested in the War.

We used to play 'War' on the playground when we were 8 years old (much like my Dad's generation played 'Cowboys and Indians'). There were War films on TV every week in the 70s. I even had a German stormtrooper Action Man, complete with stalk hand-grenades, round helmet, sidecar etc. (I also had a few British 'Tommy' Action Men too, to put things in perspective).

The point being, there was so much interest in the War around that time, you kind of couldn't escape it. Sumner and Hook's generation would've grown up with fathers and mothers that vividly remembered the War; not necessarily doing service, but having to live through it.

Something as monumental as WWII, so close in living memory, was bound to be of interest to young men growing up in the 60s / 70s.

Couple that with 'Punk' and the want to rebel / shock, and it's no wonder that quite a few bands dubiously flirted a little with 'choice' imagery. What better way to get up the adult generations' noses than to be seen to be 'supporting' ideals that their parents fought against?

As regards Ian, it's been 25 years since I read Debbie's book. I think there was some reference to one or two incidents, but nothing really sticks in my brain. If he was a massive racist, I think that would've been the image I took away after reading the book, which I didn't (at the time).

But, as I said, I really can't remember the incidents in question, so they were probably just 'slightly unsavoury' occurrences rather than something atrocious. It's also only Ms Curtis' word to go on though. I'm not saying that she would lie about things, but things get misremembered all the time by people.

The other thing to bear in mind is how attitudes change over the years. I'm not wanting to defend any sort of racism, but you have to remember that casual racism proliferated society in the 70s. TV programmes like 'The Black & White Minstrel Show', 'Love Thy Neighbour', 'It Ain't Half Hot, Mum' etc. were on telly a lot.

It would be 'easier' for someone in the 70s to slip into saying something that we would find abhorrent by today's standards. Especially when people were being 'influenced' by the programmes listed above (among others) to find racism 'funny'.

Anyway, heavy stuff to be talking about on an internet forum.

You watch, now that I've 'kind of' defended Ian, someone's going to quote one of the things mentioned in Ms Curtis's book that I couldn't remember, and I'm going to find myself horrified at myself...

Lol. Never read her book. But I remember people making comments about her mentioning some nazi related german march he had playing at their wedding. That's the only thing I remember hearing. Oh and him making fun of some handicapped kid neighbor but it was debunked later that the term Ian used to describe the kid was actually common for the area and just misconstrued and he wrote about the kid later in a song sympathizing.

perspexorange wrote:

The other thing to bear in mind is how attitudes change over the years. I'm not wanting to defend any sort of racism, but you have to remember that casual racism proliferated society in the 70s. TV programmes like 'The Black & White Minstrel Show', 'Love Thy Neighbour', 'It Ain't Half Hot, Mum' etc. were on telly a lot.

It would be 'easier' for someone in the 70s to slip into saying something that we would find abhorrent by today's standards. Especially when people were being 'influenced' by the programmes listed above (among others) to find racism 'funny'.

Yes. I was thinking particularly of Starsky & Hutch myself. Anyone old enough to remember the TV show may have had a go at impersonating Huggy Bear at some point. Does that mean they're racist? Not necessarily, Huggy was cool! (wasn't he?). And there were those "Blaxploitation" films too. Impersonating someone from those films doesn't necessarily make you racist. Shaft was great (and why did everyone give the Samuel L Jackson reboot a hard time?). But anyway, I agree with £50 Note's comment; only Steve can really answer the question.

In the BBC documentary Synth Britannia, Phil Oakey of Human League says something along the lines of "Punk was what really ended the war" for young people in the U.K., meaning there was still an air of bombings, rationing, and 'knees up in the subway" hanging over society, and punk finally gave the kids their own voice. In the Joy Division documentary Barney talks about growing up in his grandmother's house, and she had a room full of war paraphernalia. I don't for a second believe that Ian, Steve, Barney, or anyone else was/is racist. They grew up surrounded with it, and flirting with Nazi imagery was a very rebellious thing to do. It was a bratty way of thumbing their noses at the older generation. Attitudes were very different in the '70s, so I'm sure they considered it all a bit of harmless fun.

I'm immediately reminded of Rik Mayall in The Young Ones. He acts like he's this tough anarchist, but he's a Cliff Richard fan, and anytime someone says anything negative about the police, his demeanor changes and he gets nervously defensive. It's all for show.

50poundnote wrote:

I'm immediately reminded of Rik Mayall in The Young Ones. He acts like he's this tough anarchist, but he's a Cliff Richard fan, and anytime someone says anything negative about the police, his demeanor changes and he gets nervously defensive. It's all for show.

Best show ever.

It still baffles me why they just dont admit that they most likely used the band names and imagery on purpose to probably shock and awe or even controversy for attention lol. I dunno.

Started reading Steve's book over the weekend and he talks quite a bit about this, actually and even he mentions how when they were looking for a new name from Joy Division, they were wanting something neutral and with no nazi or political leanings whatsoever...yet they chose New Order, which he says "had no nazi connotations whatsoever" when it very verrrry evidently and very well known, publicly does. And its also the name of some very high profile nazi groups that were around since the 60s and again, the big Hitler term for Hitlers big plan. Everybody and their dog knows about this. No way in hell they couldnt have known that. Esp given how much Ian was into that stuff and how much the band were fascinated by the war. Why the secrecy? Just admit you did it on purpose for kicks and sarcasm. Just my opinion . Lol. Not saying they're really nazis..just I cant for one second believe they had NOOO clue about that and how they all use the same weird explanation. It's not like, if they admit they did it to get a rise outta people that it would hurt the band in any way. Every other band that did it admits it now and it never caused any issues for them.

Its that that baffles me and yeah, personally it irks me. I love the band in every other way. It's just this one thing that drives me nuts. Lol

If anyone could shed some light on that one, it would be greatly appreciated.

You're letting this worry you too much.

How many stupid names are bands stuck with because the "joke" name they picked caught on? I can think of several right off the bat, the most high profile one being Foo Fighters. Dave Grohl never intended for that to be the band's name.

I forget if it's in New Order Story (the 1994 documentary) or somewhere else, but Barney said something to the effect of "the name becomes [the band] after six months anyway." Gillian said she "thought it was just the new order of the group." They didn't put nearly as much thought into it as you're trying to read.

If you really want to know their politics, they posted the EU flag to their Twitter account after the Brexit vote, and in an interview before Blue Dot, Barney let it be known he's anti-Brexit.

Doesn't sound like Nazis to me....that'd be Morrissey.

The phrase new order has been used countless times (at least stateside) with no nazi (or band) connotation. It’s very believeable. Go with Occams Razor here - the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.

LostSiren wrote: The phrase new order has been used countless times (at least stateside) with no nazi (or band) connotation. It’s very believeable. Go with Occams Razor here - the simplest explanation is probably the correct one.

I know but it just surprises me they didnt, out of all people, given how much Ian was into the whole ww3 and nazi history.. you'd think they'd have been aware of it, given it's a very big part of the nazi history and culture. The term and ideal. So the general public might not have, but they definitely would be ones I'd think would have known. Unless it really was just Ian that was that deeply interested in it and the reat just went along with it kinda mindlessly. They were indeed young. So who knows.

They'd been working with the likes of Quincy Jones and New York dance scene since early 80s, they would probably have noticed if Steve was racist. Don't think so.

They got the idea for the name New Order from a headline in the Guardian newspaper .Something like "Hope for the new order of Kampuchean refugees" ?

Fotzepolitic wrote: They got the idea for the name New Order from a headline in the Guardian newspaper .Something like "Hope for the new order of Kampuchean refugees" ?

Sunday Times, no?

(How nerdy am I?)

*Edit* See Hook's book Substance: the first page of the chapter called This Is New York (AKA p17 of the paperback). Alternatively see this Guardian article (!) which mentions the Sunday Times (near the blue pic of Hook).

Debaser wrote:

Fotzepolitic wrote: They got the idea for the name New Order from a headline in the Guardian newspaper .Something like "Hope for the new order of Kampuchean refugees" ?

Sunday Times, no?

(How nerdy am I?)

*Edit* See Hook's book Substance: the first page of the chapter called This Is New York (AKA p17 of the paperback). Alternatively see this Guardian article (!) which mentions the Sunday Times (near the blue pic of Hook).

Ah ok.Sunday Times.

Remember the first time you were drunk? No. I can't imagine Gillian heading a Nazi rally. 'Er yes, ha ha ha! Kill the Jews, er, yes, ha ha ha!'

Fotzepolitic wrote:

Debaser wrote:

Fotzepolitic wrote: They got the idea for the name New Order from a headline in the Guardian newspaper .Something like "Hope for the new order of Kampuchean refugees" ?

Sunday Times, no?

(How nerdy am I?)

*Edit* See Hook's book Substance: the first page of the chapter called This Is New York (AKA p17 of the paperback). Alternatively see this Guardian article (!) which mentions the Sunday Times (near the blue pic of Hook).

Ah ok.Sunday Times.

I've often wondered how easy it would be to track down this article. I wonder if the Times has an online archive. If it was indeed the Sunday Times, it shouldn't be that onerous to check. There's presumably only a few Sundays that the article could've appeared in (between the Beach Club gig on 30/07/80, when they billed as the No-Names, and their first scheduled gig as New Order on 04/09/80). 5 x Sunday papers, by my reckoning.

This does depend though on the band remembering correctly (it could very easily have been, for instance, the Wednesday edition of the Guardian). Also, as the band were bandying names around for a while, they might have had the name ear-marked for a few months before adopting it. I guess it's safe to say that 25th May 1980 would be the earliest Sunday that they'd have seen the article.

Whenever I think of the band misremembering stuff, I'm reminded of two classic Barney things:

a) In Hooky's book he says that Sumner had no recollection of the song 'Procession' and got really uppity when Hook pressed him on it. Maybe he's trying to repress the memory of playing that song at Glasto '81 and the incident that happened.

b) There was an interview with Steve and Bernard on BBC Breakfast around the release of 'Total' where Sumner was adamant that the band were never called Warsaw, despite the fact that they played 20+ gigs under that name. Steve looked incredulous. Funny stuff.

Michael Monkhouse wrote: Remember the first time you were drunk? No. I can't imagine Gillian heading a Nazi rally. 'Er yes, ha ha ha! Kill the Jews, er, yes, ha ha ha!'

😂 😂

perspexorange wrote:

Fotzepolitic wrote:

Debaser wrote:

Fotzepolitic wrote: They got the idea for the name New Order from a headline in the Guardian newspaper .Something like "Hope for the new order of Kampuchean refugees" ?

Sunday Times, no?

(How nerdy am I?)

*Edit* See Hook's book Substance: the first page of the chapter called This Is New York (AKA p17 of the paperback). Alternatively see this Guardian article (!) which mentions the Sunday Times (near the blue pic of Hook).

Ah ok.Sunday Times.

I've often wondered how easy it would be to track down this article. I wonder if the Times has an online archive. If it was indeed the Sunday Times, it shouldn't be that onerous to check. There's presumably only a few Sundays that the article could've appeared in (between the Beach Club gig on 30/07/80, when they billed as the No-Names, and their first scheduled gig as New Order on 04/09/80). 5 x Sunday papers, by my reckoning.

This does depend though on the band remembering correctly (it could very easily have been, for instance, the Wednesday edition of the Guardian). Also, as the band were bandying names around for a while, they might have had the name ear-marked for a few months before adopting it. I guess it's safe to say that 25th May 1980 would be the earliest Sunday that they'd have seen the article.

Whenever I think of the band misremembering stuff, I'm reminded of two classic Barney things:

a) In Hooky's book he says that Sumner had no recollection of the song 'Procession' and got really uppity when Hook pressed him on it. Maybe he's trying to repress the memory of playing that song at Glasto '81 and the incident that happened.

b) There was an interview with Steve and Bernard on BBC Breakfast around the release of 'Total' where Sumner was adamant that the band were never called Warsaw, despite the fact that they played 20+ gigs under that name. Steve looked incredulous. Funny stuff.

I've tried looking for it online and no luck. I've found things similar but not exactly, though.

Also, it says in most articles that it's from the Guardian. So, who knows.

Well, maybe they weren’t aware of that connection. I wasn’t, so maybe they weren’t.

I know very little about Wagner, so can’t really comment on what you’re saying. However, if you’re correct, maybe they should’ve done a bit of research. But, that being said, it’s not like they’re coming out singing ‘Deutschland Uber Alles’. In other words, very few people going to the gig would recognise it as a ‘problematic’ piece of music.

I’m not being critical here, but I think you’re looking for dubious motives that aren’t necessarily there.

I think they should stop using wagner and the diving business too

Not because of any nazi connections but because its a crap way to start a gig....i miss the days of them just walking out and saying hello

perspexorange wrote: Well, maybe they weren’t aware of that connection. I wasn’t, so maybe they weren’t.

I know very little about Wagner, so can’t really comment on what you’re saying. However, if you’re correct, maybe they should’ve done a bit of research. But, that being said, it’s not like they’re coming out singing ‘Deutschland Uber Alles’. In other words, very few people going to the gig would recognise it as a ‘problematic’ piece of music.

I’m not being critical here, but I think you’re looking for dubious motives that aren’t necessarily there.

Yeah but it's used with the 1936 Germany olympics divers clip and album cover NOM with the diver from it that Hitler hosted. Was a huuuuuuge part of history and major historical event leading up to ww2. So..definitely are aware of the link there. It's just very poor taste and bizarre. If in an innocent artistic symbolic way..then okay ..just explain it. But it's just weird. No explanation to it.

Really always rubbed me the wrong way. The track itself is also samples in All Day Long, too and it's used in the Nosferatu film that Barney and Ian liked. So I thought maybe that's where the idea came from, but with the accompanied imagery and the very historical linkage to it and the music I was like..ugh. .

So I dunno. All weird.

I love the band. Just really irks me to even fathom any of them being a fan of any of that shit. Then it also doesn't help when Hooky-camp fans add to the Barney being a secret Nazi supporter stuff.

lentils wrote: why would they even dare use Das Rheingold by Wagner (who was anti-semitic and Hitler was a huge fan and used his stuff in propaganda and other things) for their recent show intros? Why do they keep doing it?? ?

Because they borrowed part of the arrangement for All Day Long?

Really, I'm sure your intentions are good, but you're trying too hard to find something that isn't there. If it bothers you so much you can always delete their music and stop listening to them.

lentils wrote: Then it also doesn't help when Hooky-camp fans add to the Barney being a secret Nazi supporter stuff.

Maybe I’m moving in different circles to you, but I’ve not heard any Hooky fans use this as ammunition. They always seem to just harp on about the formulaic nature of New Order’s set.

Again, I wasn’t aware that the divers were from the 1936 Olympics

I think the fact that no-one else seems to be mentioning this on the ‘net should reassure you somewhat that there’s nothing really in this. Sure as eggs, if there was any real meat to this, the internet would be jumping all over it.