Originally posted by frank smarra well its 60-40 in favor of joy division
Good, best get in touch with New Order's management to tell them that 5-11 and 3-16 need to be renamed as 6-10 and 4-15 for the US and Antipodean markets then?
;)
Dates
· UTC
Ceremony ; primarily JD or NO
Archived209 replies · 4,174 views
This is an archived legacy thread. Replies are closed, but the discussion is preserved.
is Ceremony primarily a JD song or a NO song?
Closed-
Ceremony is primarily a Joy Division song 58 (55%)
-
Ceremony is primarily a New Order song 48 (45%)
106 votes · voting closed
← Back to Digital Republic
Showing posts 61–90 of 210
↑ First post
Latest post ↓
We can go round & round on this all day. You say tom-aye-toe, I say tom-ah-toe.
Never the twain.
If people really think of JD when they hear this though, I am genuinely surprised after all this years of being a fan. It's one of New Order's finest moments - if not their finest - and I never once think of JD when I hear this.
Each to their own.
The question was not, "is it a JD song or a NO song?", but "is it primarily a JD song or a NO song?"
The answer to the first question must surely be NO, but to the second JD.
What a cracking debate this has been. Interesting geographical divide as well - clear patten.
Seems that those who, I would guess, have barely seen NO play live (put my mortgage on less than 5 times each) take the 'what the centre-labels tell us' line as I guess history books etc is where the majority of their knowledge comes from. For history books read mag articles etc as these are all written by muso journos. Whereas the UK based fans - Johnny, Al, Dave H, Hac & Myself have 150 gigs between us - who have seen Ceremony played on nearly every occasion and (Area:One tour aside), whether we like this or not, have had our thinking shaped & influenced by our experiences.
Personally, up-front experiences have a greater impact on me than technicalities e.g. info lifted from a record sleeve etc, much of which we now know is inaccurate as far as JD/NO are concerned. A good proportion of the knowledge I've gained about the band has been through events I've seen first hand or through speaking with other fans who've had a broader exposure than me - Al, Johnny, 445 & Benny to name but a few - and the fact is JD never released/recorded Ceremony but NO did. NO toured the track, took it to the masses & shared it with us.
Demo tapes, well we've had that discussion before, splitting hairs there I'm afraid & Still was released well after JD crashed & burned.
No disrespect to our American friends but when I scroll down these posts it looks like a discussion between those who have followed their team home & away, and armchair supporters who peddle the saloon-bar view.
The 3 16/5 11 point is a compelling piece of evidence and I'm afraid I've heard no plausable counter argument to persuade me otherwise. Think Al sums it up, when Ceremony starts to kick in, never over the last 17 years have I thought or felt this to be a JD song, never has Barney introduced it as a JD track, which he regularly does with JD tracks. Why? because it's *primarily* a NO track that's why.
Goodnight.
Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb Eyes Good points well made JG.
Agreed.
You stay on the shandy last night, JG? That was all rather eloquent..
I've always heard it as NO's first real musical acheivement, so I guess I'll vote NO. Besides, the two or three JD versions (there may be one other besides Still or the box set that I'm not thinking about) haven't really come off well, but that's due more to lousy recording than the band's performance. so, anyway, New Order's it is.....
NEW ORDER song for me!
And what a great one at that.Laugh....i could almost carry on working.
this is getting silly. let's stop a flame war and just consider the facts here:
the JD versions we have are very much the finished song.
NO rewrote the lyrics to the first verse. although they're not understandable on "H & S", they're definitely not the same lyrics as on the released versions.
NO both released it and played it live during a time when they were no playing any JD songs.
everyone should be able to draw a conslusion from these that they are personally happy with, without getting into a slagging match. let's just act like adults, eh?
At least we have learnt something from this poll, there are members that like to debate and others that only dictate!
Originally posted by comEar At least we have learnt something from this poll, there are members that like to debate and others that only dictate!
And how do you divide up the two camps? This is my favourite New Order song of all time, and I've thought of it - as just that, a New Order song - for 20+ years. Right through my teens, my twenties and my thirties. There is nothing to debate as far as I'm concerned. And it seems the majority of my peer group agree.
I'm just truly amazed that people might initially think 'Ah, Joy Division!' when they here the opening bassline, that's all.
Now, Eric Cantona? ManYoo player, or Leeds player?
Here's my tuppence worth on this.
If I remember correctly "Ceremony" was going to be recorded by Joy Division in May/June 1980 during or shortly after the end of their American tour. It was to have been released as a single on Factory in Autumn, 1980 had events not otherwise intervened. So primarily for me at least it is a JD song. I suspect New Order (and Factory) released Ceremony b/w In A Lonely Place as a fitting tribute to Ian, and secondly because these two songs were far better than anything else they had written themselves by early 1981.
But the difference isn't all that important as I believe that JD and NO are esentially the same band (no shit Sherlock I know)
I just wish they'd release the original 7 and 12 inch New Order versions of these tracks on CD.
Originally posted by little boy lost The question was not, "is it a JD song or a NO song?", but "is it primarily a JD song or a NO song?"The answer to the first question must surely be NO, but to the second JD.
Yes! Completely true. Ceremony is a NO song, but the way it sounds is JD - since they didn't change the way the song is played from JD to NO. But, since JD never released it, it is a NO song. Now, let's all go back to something more meaningful...
Originally posted by ken colquhoun Here's my tuppence worth on this.If I remember correctly "Ceremony" was going to be recorded by Joy Division in May/June 1980 during or shortly after the end of their American tour. It was to have been released as a single on Factory in Autumn, 1980 had events not otherwise intervened. So primarily for me at least it is a JD song. I suspect New Order (and Factory) released Ceremony b/w In A Lonely Place as a fitting tribute to Ian, and secondly because these two songs were far better than anything else they had written themselves by early 1981. But the difference isn't all that important as I believe that JD and NO are esentially the same band (no shit Sherlock I know)I just wish they'd release the original 7 and 12 inch New Order versions of these tracks on CD.
What a great 
i voted for NO, as i mentioned earlier, as they made it what it is, but here's a new spin:
since i can't understand a damn thing either ian or barney is saying in either version (with the exception of 'avenues, all lines with trees'), i'll put it this way:
ceremony = primarily a bernard sumner song (with lyrics by ian curtis).
Originally posted by Al Jarvis > Originally posted by comEar> At least we have learnt something from this poll, there are members that like to debate and others that only dictate!
I'm just truly amazed that people might initially think 'Ah, Joy Division!' when they here the opening bassline, that's all.
Now, Eric Cantona? ManYoo player, or Leeds player?
Let's face it. Most people haven't even heard the JD bassline opening - sales of Heart and Soul......
IT'S A NEW ORDER SONG !!!!!
Strange that on the 511 dvd during the new order 9802 segment, Barney starts talking about doing old Joy Division songs and then a live clip of In a Lonely Place is played! Proof even the band members think so.
Then why include both on Retro if they were Joy Division songs? Both are I suppose, transitional songs between JD and NO and are unique in that respect but like Al says, if you hear Ceremony at a gig or on the radio you immediately think of New Order. That answers is surely?
btw - as an aside, is there much difference between the versions of Ceremony on 7" and 12"? Have got a copy of the 7" but not sure if I've heard the 12" before.
Originally posted by comEar Strange that on the 511 dvd during the new order 9802 segment, Barney starts talking about doing old Joy Division songs and then a live clip of In a Lonely Place is played! Proof even the band members think so.
Sorry, remind us why 5-11 was called 5-11, and why 3-16 was named 3-16?
The video was the work of Miles Prowse, not the band themselves. And that interview was done by Jonathan, a regular poster here. Jonathan will know more but I think Andy Robinson had a hand in the editing too. (I think it says this at the end of the documentary, no?).
I think the important thing was that Barney was talking about Ian looking down from above - which was then the perfect introduction to Barney's "Ian Curtis; rest in peace, man" closing comment at the Apollo in 98. It wasn't the song that was the important thing (using Isolation would've been better, no?) but the comment itself, surely?
Anyway, that's me talking about Ceremony just prior to this, and I still maintain that is - primarily - a New Order song.
Originally posted by Wolfmann > Originally posted by little boy lost> The question was not, "is it a JD song or a NO song?", but "is it primarily a JD song or a NO song?"> > The answer to the first question must surely be NO, but to the second JD.>
Yes! Completely true. Ceremony is a NO song, but the way it sounds is JD - since they didn't change the way the song is played from JD to NO. But, since JD never released it, it is a NO song. Now, let's all go back to something more meaningful...
Who ever said the stuff above really hit the nail on the head. This is the complete truth, giving proper credit to both bands where the credit is do. So, please close this thread as the questions have all been answered.
Who ever said the stuff above really hit the nail on the head. This is the complete truth, giving proper credit to both bands where the credit is do. So, please close this thread as the questions have all been answered.
Damn right. Make it stop!!! Please!!!
Originally posted by mh > Who ever said the stuff above really hit the nail on the head. This is the complete truth, giving proper credit to both bands where the credit is do. So, please close this thread as the questions have all been answered.
Damn right. Make it stop!!! Please!!!
Hello... webmaster, are you out there? Lock this thread please!!!!
Originally posted by frank smarra I heard hooky once say that Ceremony to him defined the End of joy division not the Beggining of New Order
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!
Originally posted by John Sweeney > Originally posted by frank smarra> I heard hooky once say that Ceremony to him defined the End of joy division not the Beggining of New Order
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!
ditto!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Originally posted by comEar > Originally posted by John Sweeney> > > > Originally posted by frank smarra> > I heard hooky once say that Ceremony to him defined the End of joy division not the Beggining of New Order>
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!
ditto!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, fantastic, we even now have people supposedly para-phrasing Hooky in attempts to bolster their arguments.
Having a chat in the pub with him one day, were we?
As I've said before, if people hear the opening bassline of Ceremony and think 'Oooh, Joy Division!' then I'm truly amazed. Perhaps you were the lucky ones who had a boot of the Brum Uni show back in 1980 then were dismayed that those upstarts released it eight months later without Ian. But you weren't, were you? I'd bet ten to the dozen that the first time you heard this song was a New Order version. And, if not, you probably came to this band quite late or just had your head stuck in the sand when New Order's version was released.
