What an incredibly patronising yet highly amusing post.
I dont visit this forum to discuss the merits of duran, or the relative merits of duran vs spandau for that matter. And I certainly dont intend to waste anymore time on the topic of duran, so these will be last words on the matter. By the way muffy I am having a very stressful and busy day at work, believe it or not replying to posts on this forum is not my top priority.
Oh my, a bitter and twisted NME reader and wannabe music critic if ever there was one. Your comments suggest that your opinions are based upon Duran's commercial heyday, a period which accounts for less than 30% of their career output and during which it was fashionable to knock bands who didn't vocally subscribe to a left wing political ethos or sing about depression filled afternoons in a basement bedsit.
Your assumption that I am a bitter and misguided nme reader, who only criticises duran because I am unable to do anything but tow the popular critical line on this band, and who would come to think differently if only she could be enlightened by their music, is mistaken. I am unfortunately all too familiar with durans back catalogue, and the majority of it isnt even good let alone great. Frankly the early records are the only ones of any note, at least they have some kitsch factor which is more than I can say for the god awful “skintrade” or “all she wants”. Im no musical snob, if you scroll up youll see that I love cheesy music, but durans records(unlike the band themselves) show little sense of irony or humour. Just because the lyrics dont make sense doesnt mean its ironic or a piss take. **Its so refreshing (NOT!) to see all the old clichéd critiques of Duran Duran being recycled yet again, obviously by someone who took all the image bullshit seriously and never stopped to think that the band might actually be taking the piss.** NEWSFLASH. If they werent taking the piss then they really were fucking sad. Personally I never take anything duran say or do seriously. Fucking hell they called an album ”seven and the ragged tiger” and dressed up in black tie and cravats for the cover. The problem for duran is that they werent very good at playing the image game. People laughed at them not with them. At first the travelogue videos were intended to be tongue and cheek. But as simon has himself said they lost sight of reality, as they became more successful. It all backfired, members left and they tried to reinvent themselves as sleek masters of raunchy rock/funk. Prince and inxs got there first and were miles better at it. Simons attempts at singing falsetto were fucking laughable too. With his braying nasal whine, he makes barney sound like sinatra.
Duran would not have been around for over 20 years if they were truly a case of style over substance.
Ahem are you sure about this? Tenacity isnt necessarily indicative of high quality music . a lot of their contempories are still going 20 years on, even if theyre just doing nostalgia tours. Are you going to stick your neck out and hail the simple minds as one of the greatest bands on the basis of their longevity? Surely not. The way I see it duran are more sad old hasbeens, who wont give up the ghost than true rock n roll survivors. They went out of fashion years ago and their music isnt strong enough to overcome their lack of credibility. When the likes of cher can enjoy a 35 year musical career, it becomes pretty clear that durability can be built on good styling, bandwagon jumping and production values, rather than true or “raw” talent as you call it.
Sure, image and style sell records, and Duran have exploited that to full effect (and who can blame them?) but even the anti-hero darlings of the 'trendy non-commercial' music scene, so beloved by the critics, have an army of stylists and image consultants to help maintain their apparent air of 'anti-establishment disrespectability'.
Well obviously stylists have taken over. And duran are a pretty sharp suited pair these days. But even that cant save them from their inherent crapness. The music industry isnt as unforgiving as we might imagine. Surely if the likes of u2 or depeche mode are able to succesfully reinvent themselves, why aren`t duran? Depeche were once a naff new romantic pop group too but they managed to earn credibility. Forget about their clothes for a minute; the style over substance argument goes much deeper than that. The complaint applies more crucially to their music. It has a slick sheen that leaves me totally cold, and not only that, but the songs are consistently not very good.
Nevertheless, if you take the trouble to actually listen to the music of Duran Duran…not just the singles from the early 80s, but tracks from ALL their albums,
I have, due to a rather tasteless housemate who forced their music on me ; Ive heard loads of duran albums Including the preposterous covers album, where the only decent track was a cover of one of their rio era songs. Apart from the wedding album and rio, there was an awful lot of filler, and a handful of sharp singles. **you will be met by a band who have explored a myriad of musical styles,** sounds onimous; wouldnt it be better to say “a band who wrote good songs”. Exploring a myriad of musical styles is often an indicator of a band lacking a sense of identity or direction, or a band on the brink of creative bankruptcy.”shit the songs are weak, how can we make the album sound interesting?”
from hard edged thrashy rock through to funk pop as well as the sort of experimental sounds and styles that later brought accolades and acclaim for the likes of U2 and Depeche Mode. You should try listening to "Medazzaland", Duran's 1997 album. It shines much brighter than their early 80's lipgloss.
Theres nothing commendable about ecclecticism for its own sake, if the songs are poor, interesting production wont disguise the fact for long. why would I want I want to listen to durans lacklustre attempts at a particular musical style, when I can listen to people who actually do the style justice?If I want to listen to funk pop Ill be turning on parliament not durans “big thing”.
Their image in the early 80's was at the time ground-breaking.
No they werent, in their very early days in fashionable circles they were considered a poor mans spandau, which isnt much of an accolade. Their “look” was a very widespread one, which originated in london at the blitz club not brum. **Duran Duran became synonymous with the New Romantic movement, which influenced not just fashion, but music too.** Hmmm, it’s the old lets defy thatcher by living fabulously thing. A good idea in principle, but in practice done with such incredible clumsiness. The new romantic look was laughable even then, and the music be it spandau or visage was worse. In fairness to duran they were the best of a bad bunch. **Nick Rhodes was (and still is) considered to be at the forefront of British style.** Hahaha! By whom? So the designer he buys his suits from says good things about nick, what do you expect? Duran keep company with the vacuous fashionista crowd, theyre hardly going to slag them off now are they? Anyway for someone so convinced of duran`s musical greatness, you seem to be focusing a hell of a lot on their image and so-called style.
Would GAP seriously consider using both him and SLB as part of their new poster campaign if they still dressed like Crockett and Tubbs???
Gap is an incredibly boring, pedestrian label, the clothes barely change from season to season. The using of these old 80s icons in their ad campaign is just further fodder for the argument that gap is the marks and sparks for 30 somethings.
I dont think so! Personally I dont wear my ra-ra skirt and leg warmers anymore. In the same way New Order dont wear the same clothes they did in 1981, neither to Duran, Ive moved on, New Order have moved on and so have Duran, perhaps you should too?
Actually if were still talking about clothes Ive been recycling all my 80s childhood gear, now that its back in fashion, and its gone down an absolute treat
You should also look at the bands who count Duran as being amongst their influences, such as Smashing Pumpkins, Blur, Sugar Ray, Garbage and Pulp to name but a few. A few years back Simon Le Bon joined the Pumpkins on stage at Brixton to sing a Duran track called "Nightboat". And seeing as Billy Corgan is so highly respected by New Order, surely his tastes and opinions of music can't be "a pile of cack".
Duran influenced some bands. So what? so did new kids on the block. Almost all sucessful bands have been influential on someone or another. All it takes for a band to be influential is for another musician or producer to like what they did. Even people in bands have occasional lapses in taste. Our barney likes bloody faithless. And as you demonstrate just because someone is a fan of a great band(the order) doesnt mean there taste is unimpeachable. The same goes for billy corgan. Hes a self-proclaimed prog rock fan, that doesnt make jefferson airplane a good band. By the way sugar ray are pants. Oh and Ill bet none of these bands cite later period duran as an influence (nightboats from their debut album, am I right?), its probably the kitsch stuff from their childhoods that they rate; shame cos they`re obviously missing out…
Barney himself says that one of his influences was Chic. Nile Rogers and Bernard Edwards worked closely with Duran for many years (there is speculation at the moment that they may move to Nile Rogers' label). Nile also rates them as one of the rawest talents in the business. So if Barney respects Chic and Chic respect Duran.... doesn't that tell you something??
Thats truly priceless liv. What an endorsement.You know hooky hates duran. Doesnt that tell you something?
New order were influenced by giorgio moroder, and he worked with his fair share of lacklustre performers. Irene cara anyone? A connection with new order isnt going to automatically make a band worthwhile. As for chic, theyre one of my favourite bands, and theyve done some brilliant production work, but after hearing the “notorious” album Ive somewhat gone off them.
As for Simon Le Bon himself, the fact that he has remained married to Yasmin, who is universally regarded as one of the most beautiful women in the world, for the past 16 years suggests to me, that perhaps after all is isnt the "total munter" you appear to think he is.
Actually I saw her in the flesh in a café a few years back and I wasnt impressed. Shes very pretty but I don`t see how someone with such an undistinctive face can be considered beautiful. Anyway this is nitpicking. Unions between beautiful women and ugly men are an age old phenomenon. Recent example angelina jolie and billy bob tornton.
So, in short, just read a few chapters of the book instead of judging it by its cover.
Actually I think I`ll just bin it
You never know...you might actually like it and want to buy the sequel.
Unfortunately, duran like herpes remain very much at large, and I`ll be doing my damndest to avoid both
Liv
by the way your suggestion that I should that I should move on from my bedsit dwelling, camus reading and chameleons playing days in the early 8os, is a bit misguided.seeing as Im only 23 and was a “spot the dog” rather than nme reader for most of that period .oh and vicious, I have no anti-duran /pro-spandau agenda either. I am thankfully very unfamiliar with the latters no doubt dire music. And martin kemp is another munter.
____________________
(chuffin' heck!!)