Touching From a Distance

Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb EYES-UH !!! I'm not convinced he was a genius. Sure, he wrote some lyrics that had far more to say and imply than many of his contemporaries, but that's as far as it goes. He couldn't sing without the assistance of technology, particularly live. If anyone was a genius in Joy Division it was Barney, who has become one of the finest songwriters of his generation.

                                                                                                                   I might have to disagree slightly. There have been numerous instances where the remaining members of the band have stated that it was Ian curtis who "spotted the riff" for many a truly classic joy division song. Hooky says that half the time they hadn't even noticed a riff while messing around until Curtis said "wait! play that again." I've read that this was the case with transmission, she's lost control and love will... to name a few. so clearly, Curtis' contribution went well beyond the lyrical. Obviously his words are among the best. As for the singing, lets be honest, barney has had more than a few awkward moments himself. In both cases, their voices and the less than perfect delivery are part of what makes their music so real in a world of bullshit music. Of course, no offense to anyone, these are just my opinions. Do have to agree that barney is a brilliant songwiter, though.

Originally posted by Benny's Cobweb EYES-UH !!! Curtisian ambiguity.

isn't that an advanced mathematical principal or something?

'stephen hawking might have proven the famed 'theory of everything' long ago were it not for the elusive curtisian ambiguity factor.' :D

I don't buy the anti-Curtis/pro-Albrecht revisionism that has crept its way into this forum, either. I agree completely with the remarks of Ghost Is Luminous, and may add a few further considerations. For one, Ian was already pointing the way toward electronic music during the days of Joy Division by bringing along his Kraftwerk LPs. Secondly, the most revealing insight to be gained from the 'Jack' magazine interview from late last year (part 1), as far as I was concerned, is that it was Ian who introduced the melodica to the band's music (and not, as I had always imagined, Bernard himself). Is it really coincidental that both elements were eagerly picked up by his closest friend in the band?

It's probably true that Bernard deserves more credit than may have come his way in the past as far as songwriting is concerned, and he may well be the crucial factor in NO's enduring success, but I am still convinced that Ian was THE driving creative force during the JD days. The fact that he emerges from Deborah's book as one big asshole should not cloud our judgement of his artistic merits.

As for Ian's singing: sure, he needed some tutoring (witness the atrocious hurls from early Warsaw recordings), and he never made the world's finest baritone, but there's nothing wrong with that. And as pointed out above, it took Bernard several years to find his true voice, too. I'm pretty sure that if he had still been around, Ian's singing would have improved considerably, too (compare Nick Cave from the days of the Birthday Party and from his latest albums).

Got it today, will start reading it tonight.

Plug for Amazon UK for the American fans interested in getting the book: I ordered it the 15th and it's here already and it was less than $15.00.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D anita

TFAD has to be the best Joy Division book out there so far, simply because it is in a first person narrative.... as far as the argument about who contributed what to the artistic process.. this book may be the WORST book to evaluate that on, simply because Debborah was never around and in the latter days said she didn't even listen to them!

Hopefully a new book will come out (that T. Wilson has nothing to do with) that will shed some more light on the professional side.

The book definetly makes for a good drama though.

I've read the book a couple of times. There was definitely a number of sides to Ian Curtis. He had always been a bit of an odd character, even from when he was young lad. Deborah still seemed to be attracted to him, for some strange reason.

During the course of the book, it seemed as though ian wanted to be on his own, but he had so much going on around him, he just caved in. It is a sad story & you have to feel for Deborah, & Ian!

Great book though!

You have to say though, like with a lot of first person narrative books, it's hard to believe that everything that happened within the book did actually happen. I'm not saying that Deborah was a liar, I just believe that if something is written wrong, people take it the wrong way.

I mean, 24 Hour Party People was quite a good book, but you knew Tony Wilson did talk a lot of bollox throuout it!