Solving this once and for all

I didn't like doing it but I voted "No".

JD & NO are inextricably linked - 3/4 of one group was 3/4 of the other etc but Ian was obviously an important factor in JD and what they created.

JD were certainly moving in the direction that NO took - but how it would have developed... we'll simply never know.

As for the "Is it NO without Gillian" question, then I'd say Yes, just about, but it sure doesn't feel 'the same' to me when she ain't on stage with the lads.

Just my 2p...

Very different but both BRILLIANT! IAN was a brilliant frontman and could NEVER be replaced hence a NEW band followed JOY DIVISION.

I think it would be interesting to get Barney, Hooky and Steve in a rehearsal room (preferably with a plethora of rats, and lots of icy cold breeze flowing through the room a la TJ's) and say "right chaps, imagine you're 23 years old. Write a song or two as if you are Joy Division". "HERESY!" I hear you cry, but it would be quite an intriguing experiment to see what they conjured up... Sorry, I'm quite bollocksed. Forgive my mildly intoxicated ramblings this evening.

I went "Yes", though somewhat reluctantly. They're very different, to be sure; New Order in many ways had to evlove from Joy Division to form their own sound. But I consider New Order's work to be what JD would have eventually done, all a part of keeping ahead of the trends.

I just voted "NO" but, I voted before I thought and now that I have thought, I vote "YES". Here is why. AC/DC! AC/DC with Bon Scott is AC/DC, just as they are AC/DC with Brian Johnson. They kept their name and it worked. Would it have worked with Joy Division, I dunno, but I think it was a bigger risk to change their name and risk losing the following they had established. Wait, I am babbling.

I dont think NO would have developed into what they are now if it hadnt been for Ians death. JD could have become something even more incredible though. What I do believe though is that there would never have been a JD or NO without Ian's existence. So whats the answer? Yes.

Well, if "Yes" is still "Yes" after 32 years and a million components changes... JD & NO should be the same band

hey! i tied the vote (14 to 14):D

i said no, just cuz they had such different styles and are both associated with different realms of music. Joy division and new order sound very different to my ears (the exception may be movement, if could get myself to buy the cd ), so i usually think of them as different bands. if you knew nothing about new order or joy division, and listened to their songs, you'd think it was a different band.

but this is not to suggest that JD was ian's band, though most of the music world instantly think of ian, instead of the whole group as a collective. historically, they are the same band. sonically (is that proper grammer? ) they're different. that's how i see it.

oh boy, this is gonna spark an intense debate...i can just see it now.

Great! I have voted yes when I wanted to vote no

So my vote is NO.

I shall explain: To me they are quite different bands. I do not know exactly why but I have always seen them as two separate entities. Actually I only got into JD very recently, before, JD to me were LWTUA and lots of dark, sad, depressing stuff.

Most of the examples people are giving of the continuity in other bands despite line up changes are not quite right, Genesis replaced Peter Gabriel with a bald moron who sounded exactly as PG, Yes have changed the line up but always within a range of professional musicians who can play exactly the same as their predecessors. Even when Buggles joined them Horn tried to mimic Anderson's voice. It was more a case of a brand "under new management" than a new musical direction.

When Ian died New Order consciously took a new musical direction. We can only guess (or better: dream) what could've happened had Ian overcome his depression. Some have pointed that the electronic avenues were opened by Ian since it was he who played Barney the first Kraftwerk songs. I tend to think that Ian was inherently "moody" and that the luminous travel to sunnier beaches New Order were to follow after Movement would not had happened with Ian at all. Same for his sombre lyrics. Can anyone imagine BLT with Ian's Lyrics:

Everytime I think of you I feel the withdrawal pains the lust of bloodsports the call of the imperialistic house of prayer

I don't think so!

Originally posted by Al Jarvis I've gone with 'No'.Would've said 'Yes' perhaps 5-20 years ago, but over time I've cared less and less for Joy Division. Even though the Order are probably now more intrinsically linked with their former incantation than ever before (the likes of Transmission, etc, in the set), I probably see the gulf between them much wider than at any point I can remember. I think that gulf has been exemplified by some of those here who claim to be 'New Order fans' and those who purport to being 'Joy Division fans' - I wouldn't have registered any difference in those labels years back, but the demographic now appears to be widening. And I know which camp I prefer to sit in.

Exactly Al, I am a New Order fan whose second favourite group is Joy Division.

NO, if only for one small reason...Ian Curtis.

I went with a big resounding YUP. But that's just my own opinion, and I fully understand and appreciate where the NO people are coming from, so I'm gonna duck out of this one...

My vote goes to No...same members, other objectives, other way of understanding music, other feelings. Hook, Morris & Summer were Joy Division in the last seventies, not nowadays...yes, they play JD songs, and i love it, but not trying to be JD, only rememberering what they've done in their musical lifes, or remembering an old friend, an old personal life, and an old style of doing things.

It seems to me in all I've read that Joy Division renamed themselves New Order primarily because of Ian's tragic death and their unwillingness to live forever in the shadow of that tragedy. They could have named themselves anything, but chose a name that is directly related to the original: NEW ORDER. By doing so they acknowledge the loss of Ian and the influence he had on their music, but also declare that Joy Division is over and a new chapter has begun. They could have easily renamed the band The Cosmic Poodles and never played a Joy Division song ever again. Instead they chose a similar name and continued to play his songs. I consider them the same band only because if Ian hadn't left us so prematurely we might all be waiting for delivery of the new Joy Division: RETRO boxed set right now. New Order became New Order only because of a terribly tragic event that forever changed it's members. By renaming the band they acknowledge their loss and that the band itself will never be the same, but that Ian's music and legacy will always be a part of NEW Order.

Exactly Al, I am a New Order fan whose second favourite group is Joy Division.

Bingo!

And for me, both groups come way ahead of the rest.

Yes!!!

i didnt vote yet i am still uncertain, but thinking about it made me wonder, if they had gotten very synthesizer heavy with JD had ian lived, would barney have become a most of the time synthesizer player and ian a most of the time guitar player? i have to say they wouldve been a different band ha dthat happened

How can one say yes or no? They sort of are and they sort of aren't. Can we move on now?

Yes, simply because 75% of the members were/are in both bands.

Originally posted by Matthew Smyth Yes, simply because 75% of the members were/are in both bands.

i agree that only 1 member was different but like i stated above the group sound would have been much different had ian lived, they either would've gotten synth player or barney wouldve handled the bulk of it making ian play most of the guitar parts, i really am starting to think it would've been a totally different group

Why can't we vote "maybe"? :p

Originally posted by Spotnick Discuss...---For me, it's the same band, they changed the name sure, but it's the same band.But on the other hand, Genesis without Peter Gabriel, is it Genesis? Is INXS without Michael Hutchence (honestly the best comparison you can do!) still INXS? The Beatles without John Lennon? Sure, Ian had talent, but obviously it was the whole band that had talent, maybe that's why it's a different thing than other bands where the talent if the thing of one or two people only...When you go see New Order live today, Gillian is not there, do you still feel it's New Order? why would it be different in Ian's case? because he was the front man?Well, that's a good excuse :D

Genesis same band w/o Peter? A BIG resounding NO

INXS without Michael? A fairly big NO

The Beatles without Lennon? Debatable - the Beatles had so much talent in the others.

Nirvana without Kurt? Never

It is SO hard to replace a powerful band frontman, especially if they are the predominate lyric writer. Ian's persona became JD's persona... just like Michael H and Peter G. You can't go on from that without changing. NO changed from JD... would JD have changed similarly without the death? To some degree I think so, but I can't see Ian doing something like Blue Monday... ever - at least not the way NO did.

Originally posted by Johnny Giles > Originally posted by Rocket Mick> Very different but both BRILLIANT!> IAN was a brilliant frontman and could NEVER be replaced hence a NEW band followed JOY DIVISION.

Says it all.

i'd have to agree also

Totally agree with the wise words of the Rocket. No need for any in depth explanations you've said it all.

I voted No because in my heart that's always what I've felt. I liked JD for a long time before I gave a chance to NO, because I thought they were too unlike anything I could ever like (boy was I wrong)! But there are people who like one band and not the other. They are associated with different styles of music (nothing about JD ever pointed to the dance floor), although the close listener to both will be able to hear the similarities.

I almost voted Yes because I just recently got the album "Movement", which couldn't have been recorded without either band. To me, it is the perfect stepping stone from Joy Division to New Order. It may not be their strongest release, but it was necessary for what NO developed into.

Except for this, I stand by my vote for No.