As a person who loves both, I remember being flummoxed to learn that there was a rivalry after being invited to a "The Smiths vs. The Cure" dance night at the Black Cat in Washington, DC (this would have been around the mid-aughts). I think there were cardboard cutouts of Morrissey and Robert Smith wearing boxing gloves flanking the stage, and the DJ alternated between playing the Smiths or Morrissey and the Cure, every other song. Obviously it resulted in a perfect dance night (all non-Smiths / non-Cure musical fat being cut and everything) and I had an amazing time.
I also had no idea about the Blur vs. Oasis thing until watching My Mad Fat Diary. I'm sure people over here were aware of it, but not the average 90s teen. The number of people at your high school or in your small town who are into certain subcultures / genres aren't plentiful enough to further subdivide themselves based on such things. I was lucky to find one other person who loved these bands enough to listen with me via a shared Walkman, one earbud each, on the bus going to away games for softball (she was a blonde cheerleader and I still keep in touch with her).
It was impossible to escape the whole Blur/Oasis thing over here in the '90s, even if you only really liked Pulp. These things are only really ever drummed up by the music press and occasionally seized on by the bands in question because they quite astutely recognise them as an excellent way to stay in the headlines. It's always the narcissism of small differences, though: as you say that night at the Black Cat sounds awesome and definitely better than a whole even of Stock Aitken and Waterman acts, which was the really opposition in the '80s.
I love both of these band’s music now but in 1983, being only 8, I think I was more concerned with “The Kids From Fame”. This rivalry, therefore, was news to me but I don’t find it surprising. For some there appears to be a strange delight in tightly defining music taste and corralling fans into distinct groups. It’s always seemed rather counterintuitive to me given how easy it is to see influences and make links between different music. To say you must like one or the other feels a little like sacrilege.
I think you’re absolutely right. I suppose one of the key factors is how as a teenager one is trying to work out who one is, trying to determine an identity, so you batten onto these largely arbitrary distinctions. And only decades later realise how ludicrous they are.
I did not know that about Whigfield and now I need to know more.
The Blue Monday story is fascinating and weirdly (or probably not at all weirdly given what I’ve been watching for these pieces) that documentary was recommended to me by YouTube almost immediately after publishing this. I shall definitely have to watch it.
So the Whigfield story was told in an interview in a magazine called TV HITS published in February or March 1997.
She mentioned so many of her influences - especially when it came to new wave and dance. The Cure stood out because it was one an Anglophone audience would probably get.
{I am thinking that some issues of TV HITS are in the Internet Archive or possibly even in Trove - the Australian and New Zealand library source}.
So glad the algorithm is working well in this instance - I had "met" some of the New British Canon when following very similar bands to the ones that Trash Theory covers.
As a person who loves both, I remember being flummoxed to learn that there was a rivalry after being invited to a "The Smiths vs. The Cure" dance night at the Black Cat in Washington, DC (this would have been around the mid-aughts). I think there were cardboard cutouts of Morrissey and Robert Smith wearing boxing gloves flanking the stage, and the DJ alternated between playing the Smiths or Morrissey and the Cure, every other song. Obviously it resulted in a perfect dance night (all non-Smiths / non-Cure musical fat being cut and everything) and I had an amazing time.
I also had no idea about the Blur vs. Oasis thing until watching My Mad Fat Diary. I'm sure people over here were aware of it, but not the average 90s teen. The number of people at your high school or in your small town who are into certain subcultures / genres aren't plentiful enough to further subdivide themselves based on such things. I was lucky to find one other person who loved these bands enough to listen with me via a shared Walkman, one earbud each, on the bus going to away games for softball (she was a blonde cheerleader and I still keep in touch with her).
Aw, I want to see a film about this friendship!
It was impossible to escape the whole Blur/Oasis thing over here in the '90s, even if you only really liked Pulp. These things are only really ever drummed up by the music press and occasionally seized on by the bands in question because they quite astutely recognise them as an excellent way to stay in the headlines. It's always the narcissism of small differences, though: as you say that night at the Black Cat sounds awesome and definitely better than a whole even of Stock Aitken and Waterman acts, which was the really opposition in the '80s.
I love both of these band’s music now but in 1983, being only 8, I think I was more concerned with “The Kids From Fame”. This rivalry, therefore, was news to me but I don’t find it surprising. For some there appears to be a strange delight in tightly defining music taste and corralling fans into distinct groups. It’s always seemed rather counterintuitive to me given how easy it is to see influences and make links between different music. To say you must like one or the other feels a little like sacrilege.
And also, you’ve reminded me that we need to cover Fame, the tv show at some point too
Yes, please!!!!
I think you’re absolutely right. I suppose one of the key factors is how as a teenager one is trying to work out who one is, trying to determine an identity, so you batten onto these largely arbitrary distinctions. And only decades later realise how ludicrous they are.
Tobias and Metro people: there's a really cool film about the whole BLUE MONDAY phenomenon.
TRASH THEORY and their NEW BRITISH CANON series - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70LF-MIX1xw
And LOVECATS came up in a quiz question which I got wrong.
Which song by The Cure begins, “We move like cagey tigers”?
The first I ever learnt of The Cure was when Whigfield was influenced by that band.
"Weirdly hummable" capstones most of the music I know and like and has stayed with me.
I did not know that about Whigfield and now I need to know more.
The Blue Monday story is fascinating and weirdly (or probably not at all weirdly given what I’ve been watching for these pieces) that documentary was recommended to me by YouTube almost immediately after publishing this. I shall definitely have to watch it.
That is fabulous!
So the Whigfield story was told in an interview in a magazine called TV HITS published in February or March 1997.
She mentioned so many of her influences - especially when it came to new wave and dance. The Cure stood out because it was one an Anglophone audience would probably get.
{I am thinking that some issues of TV HITS are in the Internet Archive or possibly even in Trove - the Australian and New Zealand library source}.
So glad the algorithm is working well in this instance - I had "met" some of the New British Canon when following very similar bands to the ones that Trash Theory covers.