I really wish I was going to be there, I think there'll be some great surprises; but this has always been a lap-of-honour. Okay, I got carried away with the rumours of new material, like many of us did, but Pulp ended as a living force at Magna. We've been lucky to see them again. But I've already said my goodbyes (sob).

I've never really understood why aren't you coming superchob? There are plenty of tickets going on ebay and from what I've seen most of them are going for around face value, some maybe even lower!

But don't you go to a live show to see the people as well as hear the music? If it was all about the music when why not just stay at home and stick a cd on?

saw119 wrote:

---

But don't you go to a live show to see the people as well as hear the music? If it was all about the music when why not just stay at home and stick a cd on?

---

Controvserial answer in : Yeah but in bands there's people who can't not be there and people you can replace. I'm sorry to say, but in Pulp, the only member who can't not be there is Jarvis. As much as i love the other ones, they replaced other people and can be replaced. If Jarvis decided to go on with Pulp with all new members, he would have the right to do so. Just like Neil Hannon went on with Divine Comedy, or Billy Corgan with the Pumpkins. Pulp has always been a "band in progress" and will always. Maybe Jarvis should think about that ?

 

It would be difficult yes, and i doubt he would... but he could. What probably happened is Candida and Mark refused to go on. Pretty sure Steve was okay with it and i felt Nick was too. That's only by judging their attitude onstage.

What if it's Mark E. Smith & Jarvis : is it Pulp or the Fall ?

andy wrote:

---

What if it's Mark E. Smith & Jarvis : is it Pulp or the Fall ?

---

 

Neither. It would be a super group called 'Paul'.

Callum, certainly for me it's a bit of both. I can't really love a band if I'm not a fan of the personalities of at least a few band members. It's while, although I think Blur produce amazing music, the fact that I don't hugely like any of the members (I certainly respect them, but they never strike me as likeable) prevents me from thinking of them in the same way I see bands like Pulp.

So it is for me that it is about both the music and the members. Yeah, it was still enjoyable seeing them play in the early 2000s, but when they walked onstage at Glastonbury with the white suited violinist it really made it all the more special for me.

It doesn't denigrate from their stunning musical catalogue, it's just that I think they're pretty amazing characters, too. Even Mark, despite my occasional teasing on here :)

Andy, I don't think that anything Jarvis writes automatically becomes Pulp - look at his solo albums for example! - certainly, as well, whilst there's a clear progression from the band that Russell and Jarvis started in 1983 (and called 'Pulp' for no other reason than that name was still around) and what they eventually became, I don't think there's that same progression from the early schoolboy band, the It band and Pulp in the mid 90s. I think the 'It' lineup was a dead end and Pulp really do begin in '83 - Jarvis and Russell admitted as much once upon a time.

Oddly, despite all this, I would still be genuinely keen - and fascinated by - any band that did continue under the Pulp banner, regardless of who was in it. I'm well aware the Russell days are over, but new material by Jarvis, Steve, Mark or whoever would be really interesting, I think. As long as it had the democracy that the Jarvis Cocker Band seemed not to!