Who would be in it today? Gordon Brown (moody b&w portrait by Anton Corbijn)? Haruki Murakami? Jamie Oliver?
― bham (bham), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:07 (3 years ago) Permalink
― bham (bham), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:10 (3 years ago) Permalink
bah, it's all ringtones and downloads. What happened to the revolutuin? etc continued 100 threads...
― mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:12 (3 years ago) Permalink
― ¡Vamos a matar, Dadaismus! (Dada), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:12 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:14 (3 years ago) Permalink
Who wants to read about Muse?
― Goo-night, Swede Hurt (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:15 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:16 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:17 (3 years ago) Permalink
― ¡Vamos a matar, Dadaismus! (Dada), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:17 (3 years ago) Permalink
I'd be reading it.
― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:18 (3 years ago) Permalink
I'd be way more interested in Haruki Murakami. But interviews mostly seem pointless.
― Goo-night, Swede Hurt (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:18 (3 years ago) Permalink
Jamie Oliver as interviewed by S.Wells.
Now yr talkin.
― mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:19 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:19 (3 years ago) Permalink
― ¡Vamos a matar, Dadaismus! (Dada), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:21 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Goo-night, Swede Hurt (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:22 (3 years ago) Permalink
sWessl was briefly great, he just ran his schtick on for way, way too long.
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:22 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:23 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Goo-night, Swede Hurt (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:24 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Goo-night, Swede Hurt (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:25 (3 years ago) Permalink
― ¡Vamos a matar, Dadaismus! (Dada), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:27 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Goo-night, Swede Hurt (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:30 (3 years ago) Permalink
― ¡Vamos a matar, Dadaismus! (Dada), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:30 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Goo-night, Swede Hurt (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:32 (3 years ago) Permalink
― mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:33 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:36 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:36 (3 years ago) Permalink
Far be it from me to impugn Mr. Wells' reputation.
― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:38 (3 years ago) Permalink
What you don't get in the modern NME I suppose is Mark E. Smith going out for beers with Shane McGowan, Nick Cave and Steven Wells and annihilating all of them (while drinking all of them under the table, natch): you're a useless drunk perpetuating negative Irish stereotypes/ you're a self indulgent middle class junkie playing at being a rock and roller/ you're working-class-redder-than-thou-skinhead-who-actually-went-to-public-school
― ¡Vamos a matar, Dadaismus! (Dada), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:38 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:39 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Duck Rivers (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:40 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Duck Rivers (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:41 (3 years ago) Permalink
00's - raving in print about bands who are signed to the parent co's rekkird label w/o declaring an interest somehow.
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:41 (3 years ago) Permalink
00's - who be this?
― mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:43 (3 years ago) Permalink
― ¡Vamos a matar, Dadaismus! (Dada), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:43 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Duck Rivers (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:43 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:46 (3 years ago) Permalink
wonder if lex likes him (or 'would like him if he'd heard of him' obv).
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:46 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Duck Rivers (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:47 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:49 (3 years ago) Permalink
the very fact that the paper is now owned by a big record company = nothing it prints can be trusted.
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:50 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:51 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Duck Rivers (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:54 (3 years ago) Permalink
― mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:54 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Duck Rivers (noodle vague), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:55 (3 years ago) Permalink
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:56 (3 years ago) Permalink
Me too.
― mark grout (mark grout), Friday, 30 June 2006 08:57 (3 years ago) Permalink
Learning the bass.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:45 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, learning the bass is a waste of time.
Morrissey is a waste of time.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
Five years in Panama is a waste of time.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:48 (2 years ago) Permalink
The long wait on Iran is a waste of time & it gets worse today, all today, following ILE thread suggesting we don't get to bomb 'em.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
Nuclear bombs are a waste of time.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
Don't stop what you started.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:52 (2 years ago) Permalink
New vinyl at Juno Records is a waste of time.
For the first time ever, leaders of the Arab Gulf states invited Iran to attend a summit in Doha, Qatar, on Monday, but President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad thought it might just be a waste of time.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
These bright young people, putting words next to words for the NME, were wasting their time, in the 1980s.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:56 (2 years ago) Permalink
This short ode Is to give you a code So that in this season You have no reason To cause a rift And see your friends miffed
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
just go to http://www.clareflorist.co.uk?lpemail=ac and use code XMA at the checkout for a 10% discount on all products from Clare Florists.
I mean, what've you got to lose?
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 6 December 2007 00:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
That was a waste of time.
― Herman G. Neuname, Thursday, 6 December 2007 01:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
Geir, can I make a suggestion? Try posting to ILX during GMT office hours, when bored UK deskworkers may actually be dulled enough to respond to you.
― Dom Passantino, Thursday, 6 December 2007 09:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
Wasting time is a waste of time.
― Mark G, Thursday, 6 December 2007 09:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
A while ago I went through a whole pile of NMEs from the late seventies at the British Library for a research project, and I can't say I was <i>that</i> phenomenally impressed.
― Zelda Zonk, Thursday, 6 December 2007 09:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
Late seventies was fairly nmeh. Try around 1984 or so.
Oh I like that mistype, keep that.
― Mark G, Thursday, 6 December 2007 10:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
They did a magazine-style compilation of the 'legendary' Burchill/Parsons punk rock era a few years back. I'm not a fan of their later writing, but even so, I was aghast at just how wretched most of it was.
In contrast, I had a copy of the 1976 hardcover NME annual, and that was pretty much wall-to-wall protopunk, and great stuff: dolls, iggy, alice cooper . .
(and while the rubbish punk singles thread was running, I actually found myself missing Sounds. Just for a minute, though.)
― Soukesian, Thursday, 6 December 2007 13:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
I never actually ever read Sounds.
― Herman G. Neuname, Thursday, 6 December 2007 13:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
They had cartoons by Alan Moore and Savage Pencil, and Pencil/Pouncey wrote for them. Standard of journalism rarely rose above fan level, but they did cover genres like metal and streetpunk which NME regarded as utterly beneath them.
The NME, on the other hand, gave you Penman and Morely banging on about Buck's Fizz and Dollar inna postmodern stylee. (Along with a lot of other good stuff, it must be said.)
― Soukesian, Thursday, 6 December 2007 13:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
Sounds was capable of being a bit more off-the-wall, NME bit stodgy. For instance Throbbing Gristle were always given a fair hearing in Sounds while NME wouldn't touch them, hated them in fact - well, not until they'd split up and they were mentioned in every third article
― Tom D., Thursday, 6 December 2007 13:55 (2 years ago) Permalink
Sounds were best for early UK punk coverage - Ingham/Dadomo/Suck etc - and their spring 1978 "New Muzik" supplement was, well, mind-expanding.
I stumbled across some late 70s NMEs a while back and was surprised at the high level of lameness on offer. Easy to selectively remember the good stuff, I guess.
― mike t-diva, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:00 (2 years ago) Permalink
Well, you cherry pick, sure.
What would you cherry pick from thesedays?
― Mark G, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
― Tom D., Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:08 (2 years ago) Permalink
In those days, there was the NME, Sounds and Melody Maker. And that was about it. I'm not sure even the Guardian covered pop music then. Nowadays, you have all the daily newspapers and their various music supplements and review sections, you've got quite a few magazines, you've got hundreds of blogs... Sure, 90 percent is crap, but it was ever thus, only in far smaller quantities. Having actually waded my way through dozens of copies of late 70s NMEs, I'm really not so sure it was that wonderful.
― Zelda Zonk, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
Everyone's saying "Late Seventies", I'm sure it was more about the mid eighties myself!
― Mark G, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:25 (2 years ago) Permalink
Well, maybe the mid eighties was much better, I didn't look at the NMEs from then.
I should add that it wasn't that there was nothing of interest from the late 70s NMEs I looked at, there were a couple of excellent interviews with Eno, for instance. But there was a vast amount of laddish fanboy crap too
― Zelda Zonk, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
There were still quite a few old hippies hanging about the NME in the late 70s
― Tom D., Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
"I'm sure it was more about the mid eighties myself!"
You're right. And the answer to the original question is that the NME would contain the better stuff from the newspaper supplements and the numerous glossy music mags, which didn't really exist back then. Most of my favorite writers from the period seem to be at The Wire now.
Sounds is a sidebar that needs its own thread, though.
― Soukesian, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, you had to get both really.
― Mark G, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
Found a Sounds poll Sounds vs NME vs Melody Maker
― Herman G. Neuname, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
Thread, not poll.
I think there's a good case to be made pegging 1984 as the NME's peak year, whereas I'd say 1978 for Sounds. Never was much of an MM reader, but was super-loyal to Record Mirror even in its wafer-thin final years (James Hamilton! The charts!). But I also got my info from Smash Hits (up until 1984 again), the style mags (The Face, i-D and Blitz), and Black Echoes / Blues & Soul. There was always a lot to wade through.
If the NME were still like it was in the 1980s, I'd be a happy man... but then again, I'm not like I was in the 1980s.
― mike t-diva, Thursday, 6 December 2007 15:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
No one has mentioned (I think) that at the NME this week it is LIKE THE 80s AGAIN!!! As daughter of 80s NME LEGEND Paul Morley conductes her first ever interview with meaningful rock band The Arcade Fire. The renaissance starts here!!!
― Raw Patrick, Friday, 7 December 2007 08:58 (2 years ago) Permalink
ILM branded as pretentious journalists
― mark e, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
Nnnggghh.
― Pashmina, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
the hell?
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
Are you sure? I think he's just treating that thread as a resource for the names of pretentious journalists from the era which he's discussing.
― DJ Mencap, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
journalists more like gothtards.
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
which journalists were inspired by bauhaus and where can i not read them?
ah ha that could be it actually. a case of transference on my behalf perhaps - ahem.
― mark e, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
Which isn't to say that I understand his point, mind
― DJ Mencap, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
Someone goatse this thread asap.
― Dom Passantino, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
Maybe he searched for Bauhaus, found the fifteen Bauhaus threads which do exist and discovered that two of them included the word "pretentious" in their titles. I understand that this is what the Grauniad calls "research."
Two points: a) We consider "pretentious" the highest of compliments. b) Max Gogarty - let it go, chaps, you lost and you lost and you lost, deal with it and move along.
― Dingbod Kesterson, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
Guardian comin' thru with the rofflez again!
― Tom D., Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
And a third point: c) Nice of them to refer to us as "journalists" especially as Michael "Reclaim Camden" Hann is particularly keen on using "trained journalists" to rip off bloggers' ideas write coherently structural articles.
― Dingbod Kesterson, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
or "coherently structured" articles proves his point dunnit
― Dingbod Kesterson, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
I preferred "coherently structural" actually. you could get a social sciences degree with that kind of waffle.
― Thomas, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
Indeed.
― Dingbod Kesterson, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:49 (1 year ago) Permalink