Well, people, now that that the weekend in Sheffield is over and the dust has settled and we have all had time to reflect on the film and this pause in Pulp's career - "a comma", as Jarvis put it - do we agree that, as commas go, that was a very beautiful one?
I know Nick's quip about if something feels good to keep doing it has been repeated a lot and it was a nice soundbite but I found Steve's answer to the last question the most illuminating when he said no matter who else he has worked with creatively, nothing has ever surpassed Pulp (with a " who knows if some seeds will fall on arable land?" metaphor chucked in). Three fifths of the group it would seem are open to the idea but as Nick said there is a spectrum of opinions in the band so, frustrating as it may be, we have to accept that not all are bothered enough to do more.
The whole press and promoting thing is something they appear agreed on - they don't like doing it. Maybe the reunion would have lasted much less time or ended on a sour note had they been stuck with days full of interviews and photoshoots every time they played a new country in 2011/12. Factor in how long recording sessions for their last two albums dragged on for, and the fact they've aged more than a decade since with families/routines established, and you can start to see the reticence from their point of view.
Sucks I know but it's real life innit?
-- Edited by Eamonn on Tuesday 10th of June 2014 06:48:12 PM
In the interview I posted Jarvis unequivocally says that it is the end of this phase of Pulp but who knows the next phase could start next week or in another 10 years (however unlikely). I'd just be happy to have something, some kind of artistic product from any combination of the collective. Hopefully Jarvis isn't putting too much pressure on himself with his current songwriting attempts. I would love another solo album.
I think the best outlook is just to take each thing we get from Pulp on its own terms, without worrying about what they'll do next. The film was brilliant and that's the important thing, not whether or not they'll ever play again. Even if they recorded a new album and announced a two year world tour, we'd still be worrying whether or not they'll record a follow up album etc.
When a band first break through it feels as if they can pretty much go on forever, and the question is "what will they do next?" rather than "will they do anything next?". But with a band at Pulp's age, there'll never be a point when they'll return to that indefinite cycle of recording and touring. Even bands who don't split up/go on hiatus tend to slow down dramatically when they reach their 50s, so it's an album every five years rather than every two. And Pulp were hardly prolific anyway, so perhaps a new album in 10 years time would actually seem quite reasonable!
I would really love it if something came after that comma, purely for the fact that now I am a grown up I can get about to see more of them live than I could nearly 20 years ago..........
I would really love it if something came after that comma, because I was too young to experience Pulp in their prime, and I lived in the wrong country (USA) so I never got the privilege of hearing any of their songs on the mainstream radio (or any radio in the US, for that matter).
__________________
The future that you've got mapped out is nothing much to shout about.
