Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

what would make you boycott a festival?

In Bloom said:
Is it that you hate music, or just artistic genius in general?

Interesting that someone named after a nirvana song should be so into a band WHO SPENT THEIR ENTIRE CAREER LIVING IN KURT COBAINS ARSE.
 
I'm seriously thinking about not going back to glasto for a while, missed last year partly because I had some fun and games to sort out in scotland at the same time, but I'd already pretty much decided not to go before I got involved in the g8 malarky.

I'd been every year since 97 before that, first few years as a steward for avalon, then running their stewards crew then running glade stewards, then jointly running lost vagueness stewards with another crew.

I'm fucking sick of working my bollocks off for free for them when there's so much cash going into certain people and mean fiddlers pockets, being told oh we'll make sure you only have to do a couple of shifts then pretty much having to stay up for 4 days solid, spending ages sorting out the stewards team in advance, and ending up with meal tickets for a cafe that's about a half hour walk across site from where we are, no free coffee arrangements for me or the crew (and a look of bewilderment when I point out there should be seeing as they want us to provide 24 hour cover for them, and we've always had this before).

grrrr then afterwards they try to charge me something like a grand for some of my crew who'd supposedly missed one shift when in fact they'd swapped with other people on my crew with my permission, then turned up to do the other shift and been told they weren't on the list and no they shouldn't have swapped, and in one case actually being pulled off a gate they had gone to staff (after swapping shifts) and told their shift was yesterday, they'd missed it and they'd be getting charged for their ticket - despite the fact they were trying to do the shift they'd swapped onto.

bunch of fucking cunts, and this after I'd pulled them out of the shit so many times I can't even begin to list them:mad:

I later found out that some fucking bullshit charity had actually made several grand out of us as well, without us being told in advance about it - seemed well sus to me but I ain't going into why here.

besides the 2004 festival I really did find myself wandering round a lot getting that been there done everything kinda feeling, with the best bit of the festival being the time I spent early morning sat on top of the big LOVE sign by the stone circle pissing about off my tits - oh and orbital for which I'd prepared myself properly.

I guess I had spent nearly 4 weeks there in 2003, which was kinda magical, 2004 just shattered this mirage:(
 
It's nothing in particular about the changes to Glastonbury that makes me think I might not bother going there again, it's been going to Sziget and deciding after that that I'd rather spend time trying out the different European festivals rather going to the same one here over and over again.
 
Yossarian said:
It's nothing in particular about the changes to Glastonbury that makes me think I might not bother going there again, it's been going to Sziget and deciding after that that I'd rather spend time trying out the different European festivals rather going to the same one here over and over again.


i see your point about that.. i guess the reason i keep going to Glastonbury is that as well as always having a great time (well almost always) I know so many people involved and love running round between the stages and cafés and that seeing old friends, some of whom i only see there anyway... I've never paid either (been going since '87 :D )
 
Skim said:
"Headlining acts: Jethro Tull
Oi! What's wrong with Jethro Tull? :mad:

Only been to Glasto in post-fence years (2002 and 2003). Enjoyed them both, and credit where credit is due, the fence kept out a lot of the undesirables who pilfered people's belongings from the tents (one news report said that crime at the festival had been down 68 per cent). (Cue accusations of troll etc).

Also there are a lot worse out there than Pearl Jam (Coldplay, Stereophonics (who were at Glasto 02) anyone)?
 
Orang Utan said:
I think you're the one being a Philistine here, Donna
No, I'm the one insisting that standards in art and aesthetics are to be taken seriously and not dispensed with for the sake of loudmouthery or populism. They don't belong to any particular field or genre: but the particular problem of pop music is that it insists on abusing them while at the same time expecting to be respected as if it did not.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
No, I'm the one insisting that standards in art and aesthetics are to be taken seriously and not dispensed with for the sake of loudmouthery or populism. They don't belong to any particular field or genre: but the particular problem of pop music is that it insists on abusing them while at the same time expecting to be respected as if it did not.

err, I think you'll find that ALL disciplines and genres of creative expression are, and almost always have been knee-deep in charlatans (no oblique reference intended) claiming aesthetic or cultural significance and morons accepting and indeed trumpeting these claims.
 
Tom A said:
Only been to Glasto in post-fence years (2002 and 2003). Enjoyed them both, and credit where credit is due, the fence kept out a lot of the undesirables who pilfered people's belongings from the tents
I wouldnt agree with that sweeping generalisation at all.
the majority of people who came in for free were alright i reckon.
putting that fence up killed the only atmosphere that was ever there.
pre fence it was all mad dogs and crusties, fuckin huge free parties going on for 3 days and loads more good drugs for sale.
everyone i spoke to over the last few years agrees that it feels boring now compared to when the convoy were there.

there were also a lot of very dangerous, machete wielding, balaclava wearing nutters around in those days who werent so much fun but it all added to the chaos (which i think is important at a festival)
 
Donna Ferentes said:
No, I'm the one insisting that standards in art and aesthetics are to be taken seriously and not dispensed with for the sake of loudmouthery or populism. They don't belong to any particular field or genre: but the particular problem of pop music is that it insists on abusing them while at the same time expecting to be respected as if it did not.

What rot.
You are a silly person.
 
thefuse said:
I wouldnt agree with that sweeping generalisation at all.
the majority of people who came in for free were alright i reckon.
putting that fence up killed the only atmosphere that was ever there.
pre fence it was all mad dogs and crusties, fuckin huge free parties going on for 3 days and loads more good drugs for sale.
everyone i spoke to over the last few years agrees that it feels boring now compared to when the convoy were there.

there were also a lot of very dangerous, machete wielding, balaclava wearing nutters around in those days who werent so much fun but it all added to the chaos (which i think is important at a festival)

thats what i thought, there were lots of radges staggering around covered in puke etc, and climbing over the fence did mean brushing with cavemen who had big sticks. but that was part of the buzz, it's not crap nowadays, but it isn'''t what it was. then theres the whole mobile phone and cashcards thing. what happened to losing you friends, finding a packet of mushrooms and making a whole new group of friends, nowadays you'd just text them to meet you at a cafe after you qued for the cashpoint.....
 
slowjoe said:
err, I think you'll find that ALL disciplines and genres of creative expression are, and almost always have been knee-deep in charlatans (no oblique reference intended) claiming aesthetic or cultural significance and morons accepting and indeed trumpeting these claims.
This is so. Problem with pop music is, though, there's not just a lot more of this about, but there's also the have-it-both-ways argument I've referred to above, whereby critics (professional and amateur) both want to reject aforementioned standards and then declare genius anyway. Fair gets on my wick, and does nobody any good (except a number of the charlatans who mention, who make a great deal of money doing this).
 
Ninjaboy said:
then theres the whole mobile phone and cashcards thing. what happened to losing you friends, finding a packet of mushrooms and making a whole new group of friends, nowadays you'd just text them to meet you at a cafe after you qued for the cashpoint.....
exactly :) nail on the head
i've been ranting about this for the last few years.
i went to to the sunrise festival this year and had an old friend of mine calling and texting me every couple of hours to find out where i was.
people saying 'i'm by the big red tent' into their phones need killing imo.

and the cashpoint :mad: dont get me started on that
 
thefuse said:
exactly :) nail on the head
i've been ranting about this for the last few years.
i went to to the sunrise festival this year and had an old friend of mine calling and texting me every couple of hours to find out where i was.
people saying 'i'm by the big red tent' into their phones need killing imo.

and the cashpoint :mad: dont get me started on that

mind you, one of the funniest things i saw first time i went ot glastonbury was some hippy going 'ohhhm....ohhhm.....' at the stone cirle being all mystical, then his phone went off....
 
thefuse said:
there were also a lot of very dangerous, machete wielding, balaclava wearing nutters around in those days who werent so much fun but it all added to the chaos (which i think is important at a festival)
The very kind of people I can happily do without thank you very much, I don't think that kind of person ever contribute anything to a festival. Do you reckon that people stand more chance of getting mugged just so there is some extra "chaos" at the festival? I'd rather have some comfort and security, any day, I have more of an issue with the fact it will around £130 a ticket next year, if not more.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
This is so. Problem with pop music is, though, there's not just a lot more of this about, but there's also the have-it-both-ways argument I've referred to above, whereby critics (professional and amateur) both want to reject aforementioned standards and then declare genius anyway. Fair gets on my wick, and does nobody any good (except a number of the charlatans who mention, who make a great deal of money doing this).

what sort of 'standard' are you talking about then, and in what way are they rejected? are you talking about the rejection of formal standards, and if so, why is this a bad thing? or are you talking about the rejection of basic intellectual standards of, say, innovation/expression/'meaning', in which case when was the last time you heard a critic say 'this band are totally unoriginal and have nothing to say but they are geniuses nonetheless'? Is it not actually the case that pop music attracts more far-fetched claims of genius simply because of its, er, popularity, and that these claims are constituted of the standards of genius being attributed to individuals or works that do not possess them - just the same as happens in any other field of 'art'?
 
Tom A said:
The very kind of people I can happily do without thank you very much, I don't think that kind of person ever contribute anything to a festival. Do you reckon that people stand more chance of getting mugged just so there is some extra "chaos" at the festival? I'd rather have some comfort and security, any day, I have more of an issue with the fact it will around £130 a ticket next year, if not more.


wouldn't you be more at home at V?
 
slowjoe said:
are you talking about the rejection of formal standards, and if so, why is this a bad thing?
I'm not sure what youy mean by "formal standards"

slowjoe said:
or are you talking about the rejection of basic intellectual standards of, say, innovation/expression/'meaning', in which case when was the last time you heard a critic say 'this band are totally unoriginal and have nothing to say but they are geniuses nonetheless'?
The first part you rarely hear: the second part, though, you hear far too often. You'll say that this is so in other firleds - I'd agree, but less so.

slowjoe said:
Is it not actually the case that pop music attracts more far-fetched claims of genius simply because of its, er, popularity
Partly, yes. But what I'm trying to get over is that pop music tends to throw around epithets like "genius", "classic" and so on -

1. without reference to what these terms actually mean, i.e. how good something actually has to be before those terms can legitimately be used ;

2. without understanding how good it is possible and necessary to be in other forms of art. This I think is at the nub of it. Pop music tends to live in very much in the world comprised of itself, its own history, and the contemporary world: it is unable to compare itself to Shakespeare or to Homer or to Beethoven or to Tolstoy or to Michelangelo because it knows nothing about any of them. It therefore tends to live within its own values and operates its own standards: but without access to what has gone on before it and without it, these standards are warped and truncated.
 
This, in turn, relates to what the actual difference is betwen pop music and classical music, somethig which is not well understood. Briefly, and generally, classical music is music with a formal education and pop music is music without one. This doesn't mean that one is good and that one is not, which would be a philistine claim and an ignorant one. But it does help explain why pop music is in some respects fearful of classical music, in the way that people who do not have an education in art are fearful of art. And a formal education is not entirely dispensible: there are things one can do and understand with a formal education that one cannot do without it. I think this matters. As it happens, it's a disadvantage which I think only genius can overcome.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
This, in turn, relates to what the actual difference is betwen pop music and classical music, somethig which is not well understood. Briefly, and generally, classical music is music with a formal education and pop music is music without one. This doesn't mean that one is good and that one is not, which would be a philistine claim and an ignorant one. But it does help explain why pop music is in some respects fearful of classical music, in the way that people who do not have an education in art are fearful of art. And a formal education is not entirely dispensible: there are things one can do and understand with a formal education that one cannot do without it. I think this matters. As it happens, it's a disadvantage which I think only genius can overcome.
I'm sending this to Private Eye
 
Back
Top Bottom