Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
  1.  
    oh dear! They can talk the talk, but not walk the walk when big bucks come calling!!!!
  2.  
    pension plan
  3.  
    I don't have a problem with it. People aren't paying for music like they used to, so good luck to them I say.
  4.  
    i don't have a problem with it either, i just find it a tad hypocritical after agitating against the capitalist mentality since '77 or so!
  5.  
    depends what you think capitalism 'is'. with a small c I see nothing wrong with it if they really are 'feathering the nest'
  6.  
    It's not the making of money from major companies per se that's the problem, it's the use of a song that was highly critical of the very thing it is now being used to sell... just doesn't ring true, whatever way you look at it.

    coercion of the senses, we're not so gullible

    I suppose one counter argument would be that the vocals don't appear in the ad, so there's a large part of the demographic that would be clueless as to the song's true sentiments, they just hear some great music and wonder who made it.. But then for the small percentage that might try and find out where the music came from and buy an album, then they'd get a different picture...
    On the other hand, if the Gang Of Four think they're being ironic... well, they're very wide of the mark...

    You can't have it both ways.
  7.  
    I do find it preferable to selling* vials of blood though!

    *or giving away with album or whatever
  8.  
    Quite. Just what on earth were they thinking when it came to the vials of blood ? Ugh. Ridiculous idea.

    At least Wire had a sense of humour when it came to the "smell of you" scent...
  9.  
    Go4 are just channeling their inner KISS with the blood gimmick: http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/kissblood.asp
  10.  
    Fergus - Ironic, no. Subversive, yes. More effective on the inside inside looking out rather than outside, shouting at passers-by?
  11.  
    I don't think that works either. If the music is all the audience hear, not the lyrics, then they don't get the critique and it's far from subversive. Like biting the hand that feeds you without actually biting it, if you see what I mean.

    I think part of the problem is that, although the critique in the song still holds as true today as it did 30 years ago, the culture that produced bands like the Gang Of Four in the late 70s, was (amongst other things) a culture of resistance to the politics of the time on various levels, and, despite there being more than enough to be angry about these days, I just don't see that resistance now, at least not in music. Things are far more fragmented and diffuse now. In other words, I think it's a lot harder and demands a different strategy to have the same kind of political impact as 30 years ago. The rallying cry is now drowned in the babble of one-sided conversations and general indifference.

    This heaven gives me migraine

    Hard to believe, looking back, that the general conservatism of the time meant the censorship of the the word rubbers from the Gang Of Four's song on the BBC... the band's refusal to play Top Of The Pops as a result was a profoundly more political (and publicity gaining) act than the neutered use of their music without the essential words to flog video games. The lifting of the ban on Jools Holland's show felt utterly irrelevant and meaningless in relation the the current cultural/political climate. 30 years too late !

    I wonder were all the original band consulted on this ad, or just Gill and King ? Find it hard to believe they would all have been in agreement on this. Or maybe they just don't give a shit anymore.
  12.  
    i dunno fergus , the TOTP incident might have got them some column inches in the NME but the GO4 never penetrated the mainstream. 3 minutes on TOTP might have put those ideas into some different minds , but they never really got beyond the post-punk massive did they?

    i was in a pub last weds night having the misfortune to watch the birmingham derby and the GO4 XBox ad got shown at half time. i groaned. sorry but that is not a subversive piece of art in any shape , size or form , it is a not hugely exciting ad for a
    games console on behalf of a not hugely credible megacorp.
  13.  
    Sure enough the publicity was confined to a relatively small constituency, and the TV exposure would indeed have put those ideas into different minds, but the BBC frustrated that possibility, but in terms of sticking to their guns, as a gesture, it had an integrity, a meaning that is utterly lacking in the xbox ad.
  14.  
    You can stream the whole of the new album here: http://newb.lk/gazHEA%20

    (and clicking helps me to win a box set.)
  15.  
    now u tell me!! I've already ordered it!!!!
  16.  
    Ironically, I once had a dream wherein I asked Colin Newman what he thought of the "Natural's Not In It" XBox ad. Sorry to report that I cannot remember his reply.

    "Entertainment!" is one of my top albums of all time. "Content" occupies a mirror-image spot somewhere near the bottom.