In which the Fiery Furnaces illustrate exactly how NOT to carry on a band feud.
Rock and roll is about perpetual adolescence. It’s about that group of inseparable mates in the corner of the playground or the back of the bus staying together and taking on the world. It’s about the abdication of responsibility and ‘sensible’ choices in favour of doing whatever the hell you want.
This state of endless childishness is perhaps the reason why rock stars feel the need to feud with each other. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s great. Stones-Beatles, REM-U2, Blur-Oasis, these are just some famous feuds in music. The recipe is simple- take two bands having success at the same time, with slightly differing musical personalities. Thus, you get the Beatles’ wild experimentation versus the Stone’s instinctual raucousness, U2′s impassioned shout versus REM’s delicate whisper, Blur’s ironic, single eyebrow versus Oasis’ neanderthal monobrow.
For the fan, taking sides in a debate like this, where one side slags the other, is about picking what view of music you stand behind. I remember as a teenager feeling like my opinions on what music I liked helped to more clearly define who I was. I love band feuds.
Not too sure about this latest one, though- if you’re in a mildly successful group, like, say, The Fiery Furnaces, you might want to aim a little smaller than, say, Radiohead then you might just be biting off a little bit more than you can chew.
Plus, you might want to get your facts right before you slag them off
Then, of course, once you’ve dug a bit of a hole for yourself, it’s really quite a good idea to shut up and stop digging. you’re probably only going to make things worse, especially if you try and talk tough
Especially if someone else calls your bluff
If that happens, then pretty much everyone will be laughing at you
Related posts: