Why would I want to see Pulp playing the first three Cure albums? :p

Nostalgia eh. Where is it gonna end ? "We'll play our classic record with the exact same instruments we recorded it with in 1964 ! those instruments still being playable or not".

it's getting mad but it kinda prove there's nothing new that is too exciting. 

though it would be great if this were Pulp I would have a serious problem with declaring that it would be their final performances

Stephen wrote:

---

I'd be interested as to Mark Sturdy's opinions on which of the early members of Pulp would actually be able to play a gig at this juncture!

---

 

 

With the exception of Peter Boam, the It line-up might be vaguely possible. Simon Hinkler, David Hinkler, Garry Wilson and Wayne Furniss are all still playing.

 

---

I suppose a Jarvis/Russell/Magnus/Pete/Candida lineup could be vaguely feasible to run through Freaks and associated tracks. Can Magnus still play? Was Candida and Pete's split too acrimonious?

---

I don't think Magnus has played since the '80s. I asked him at the book launch in '03 whether he might ever take up the drums again, and he sort of laughed and said "maybe" - but more in a "never say never" sort of way than an "I am seriously thinking about it" sort of way.

Pete, don't know. He was involved with writing Sunrise apparently, so he might not be entirely out of practice.

What you need to remember though, is that there's a difference between The Cure doing their early stuff and Pulp playing It or Freaks. The Cure's first three albums have always been regarded as some of their best work, and are the reason a lot of people were interested in the band in the first place. Pulp's early releases, on the other hand, were failures - certainly commercially, and to some extent artistically. Jarvis has certainly said enough times that he's embarrassed by a lot of that stuff, and while there's still a lot that can be got out of them with a sympathetic ear, it's easy to understand why. They make sense in retrospect, as a step on the way to what Pulp became in the '90s, but on their own? Yes, there are a few nutters like us who would love to see them play all those old songs, but the populace at large doesn't really care and I think there are some fairly valid reasons for that. It would be like Blur doing a tour of songs by Damon's dodgy '80s college band, or Oasis playing the songs of The Rain. Or that bit in one of the Alien films (I think) where they find the room in the spaceship where all the early failed experimental creatures are thrashing around, hideously deformed and tormented. Actually, I'm coming round to this now...

You realise by 'changing the line up' they're just adding an extra musician each time. It's not that absurd. When Pulp reformed didn't Russell keep coming and going off the stage?

Why isn't Lol Tolhurst playing drums on the first two albums? Has he forgotten how to play them?

Re: Mark's comments on the early Cure records, this clashes quite nicely with what I was thinking on the last Supergrass tour. For those who weren't there, they played three tracks off each album, in reverse order. Obviously this meant the audience were quite restless at the start, but by the time of Supergrass, In It for the Money and finally I Should Coco (six songs!) it had seemed well worth the wait.

I remember thinking at the time that perhaps only Ash could pull off similar and, whilst it was nice to imagine Pulp doing it, there would be one very confused/upset/bored audience for the last bit.

Setlist: Sunrise, Bad Cover Version, Birds in Your Garden, This is Hardcore, The Fear, Help the Aged, Sorted for E's and Wizz, Common People, Underwear, Do You Remember the First Time, Joyriders, Acrylic Afternoons, Babies, Razzmatazz, O.U., Countdown, Love is Blind, My Legendary Girlfriend, I Want You, There's no Emotion, Master of the Universe, Blue Girls, Wishful Thinking, My Ligthtouse.

Yep, one confused audience.

PS I took the three tracks based on which have been the three most performed songs from each album, as presumably they're Pulp's own favourites.

saw119 wrote:

---

However, it just makes me feel sad that Pulp don't seem to want to do this kind of thing.

---

Have they said that?   

I would love to see Pulp do whole albums, but realistically only His 'n' Hers, Different Class and Hardcore would be likely to attract an audience.  I can't imagine that many people in the wider world having any interest at all in It or Freaks.  Even Separations and We Love Life would be unlikely to get much interest.

The Brixton shows did span from Countdown to Bad Cover Version, which is pretty impressive considering that the majority of the audience were probably only there for the Different Class material.

saw119 wrote:

---

If a band plays a song you don't know why do so many people drift off? Surely you've gotta be engaged through everything? I would like to think that Pulp could engage anybody regardless of setlist choices but maybe I'm wrong. It would make me very sad if I am.

---

I can't speak for Pulp as I am close enough to being a nutter, that I have never heard a song thay have played live that has not engaged me in the dozen of so gigs I have seen down the years.  There are quite a few bands whose range of material I like that do likewise.

However, with other acts I do drift off.  It tends to be acts where I'm only aware of one or two albums, or have an active dislike of their more recent material.  Normally when I go to the concerts with a friend or my wife.

Yes but if they advertised it as whole album tours, those not interested in pre-His N Hers music wouldn't bother coming

Stephen wrote:

---

Other Stephen. Nutters? Yes, I think so. I don't think I've ever trawled the recesses of any band's archives more than I have with Pulp. And it's not some wankerish completists thing either, it's 'cos there really is such quality there. Even in the muddiest sounding mid 80s gig, you can still hear it and think a) I can hear a glimmer of what they will become - and it's great and b) this band are unlike anything before since...or anything to come!

I don't think Pulp can/could engage audiences regardless of setlists. Just listen to any gig (esp. 2011 reunion ones) where they're playing a Bar Italia or a Wickerman. It can sometimes be hard to hear the song over the audience chatter.

---

 I agree with everything you say. I am on a massive 80's Pulp kick at the moment. I just find those records and the personalitites in the music so charming and enjoyable. Can't help it, so why try to? One of the reasons I mentioned engaging audiences was because the recording of the 2nd night at Brixton 2011 has a lot of people talking during some songs. It astonished me when I heard it and to be honest it still does. I can understand it at a festival where the audience isn't necessarily there to see that band in particular but at the last night of a headlining show that could have been the last headlining solo show that Pulp did was unbelievable to me!

Btw Mr. Sturdy, have you had a chance to check through those tapes yet...?