After hearing Spike Island, anyone else wish they'd held After You back for these sessions?

andy wrote:

---

It could be like Different Class or This Is Hardcore, an album with 11 singles.

---

I wouldn't quite go that far. I accept that the majority of "Different Class" could have been released as a single but a lot of that would depend on the order in which they were released. For example, the second single was always going to sell well following the success of "Common People" but to me, "Live Bed Show" and "Bar Italia" are great album tracks but not singles. Also, "I Spy" would have needed censoring, "FEELINGCALLEDLOVE" may have needed a shorter intro and "Monday Morning" a shorter outro as the shouty bits are probably a bit much for daytime radio. "Pencil Skirt" or "Underwear" would have been fine though had the latter not already been a B-side.

With regards to "This is Hardcore", I have never classed this as a single-heavy album. The title-track would never constitute a single for me but it was a bold move with a great video and "A Little Soul" is just crap. The obvious "Party Hard" aside, there's only really "Sylvia" and "Glory Days" that I would class as singles. "Help the Aged" does have a soaring chorus and great video but I'd say that it was more a follow-up single than a comeback. "I'm a Man" would have sold well but it's a bit over-sludgy and they couldn't play it live.

I'd say that "We Love Life" had more singles than "This is Hardcore"; "Weeds", "Minnie", "Birds in Your Garden", "Bob Lind" (censored) and "Bad Cover Version" (earlier) are obvious radio-friendly hits. Oh, and "Sunrise" could have been huge in 2000 when everyone wanted a piece of it.

Apologies, I have always hated "A Little Soul". I fully understand how important the subject matter is to Jarvis but the song does absolutely nothing for me.

I do like "Bar Italia" but for me, it seems to work better as the album's closing track than it ever would have as a single. I do remember reading somewhere that Island were initially opposed to releasing "Sorted for E's and Wizz" as a single because of its folky/slower sound when compared to "Common People" so maybe at that point, they were thinking along the same lines as I was in my previous post. Obviously, they must have changed their mind at some point to allow "This is Hardcore" as a single, perhaps in light of seeing how many copies "Different Class" sold. 

Interesting point around Radiohead but Pulp's sales and chart positions did drop following the "This is Hardcore" single (though not disastrously). I believe that they could have easily turned it around if the 2001 comeback single had been a lot stronger, particularly now we've heard "After You" and "Got to Have Love", either or both could have been a chartstorming hit. 

I thought exactly the same about "Song 2" when I first heard it; a B-side that somehow found its way onto the album which did sometimes seem to happen with Blur in general. I thought that "Look Inside America" and "On Your Own" were the obvious singles (the latter eventually was) then when "Song 2" was being promoted, I couldn't believe it. But it worked very well. 

hehe dont apologize its ok to not like A little Soul. I just dont get it why some of you hate it. It's got a good melody, a very smart production, even smarter lyrics and way of talking about the subject. It's a Jarvis gem. Something only he could come up with.

It's weird, it's probably his most heartfelt song, and his fans are turning their back on it. Its crazy. I'm sure he was a bit disappointed the song was not bigger in every way. but it's music, sometimes it cant be explained.

I agree though that not releasing a big single like "After You" and "Got to Have Love" in 2001 was a mistake. But Pulp are known for weird choices. Still, we take singles for granted years after they are released like "yeah, that was obvious". but was it ? Common People success was a surprise, Wonderwall was a surprise for Oasis and Liam didn't even want it on the album thinking it was rap music !

Singles and popular songs work in mysterious ways. timing is everything, and of course now endorsment, social media help. Back then you only got radio and tv plays. And if ratings weren't good, you were quickly dropped.

Is that a direct quote from Nick or someone else involved or is it Sturdy surmising or paraphrasing?

Eamonn wrote:

---

No offence but can we not have the same old convos about the old albums?! Especially when Lipglossed has written a great post about the themes on the new record?

---

 Cheers Eamonn :)

Frisko2000 wrote:

---

After hearing Spike Island, anyone else wish they'd held After You back for these sessions?

---

No, not really. To tell you the truth, I'm one of those weirdos who prefers the James Murphy-produced version over the original demos. I think it sounds better.

I also think it worked best with the 2011-13 'incarnation' of Jarvis. Plus it was remixed by Soulwax and made it onto the GTA V soundtrack, which is an added bonus.

It's also the last song Steve ever made with Pulp.

Ian wrote:

---

I prefer the 2000 demo but I still like the 2013 version. I don't wish that they had held it back for this album, it's better left where it is. Been there / done that kind of thing.

---

 Yeah, plus it feels different from these new songs. And it's a bit snappier than 'Spike Island', for example.

Shouldnt be long until we get a new teaser from the album now.

Pulp sign an open letter defending freedom of expression in the wake of attempts by Westminster to censor the band Kneecap. Other signatories include Fontaines DC, Massive Attack, Paul Weller, Primal Scream, The Pogues, Thin Lizzy, and Lisa O'Neill, who's supported Pulp on multiple occasions. Full text here: x.com/paulwellerHQ/status/1917865396276785340

I dont know much about the subject but after 20 seconds of search about that band, i'm pretty Pulp didn't read what they signed.

lipglossed wrote:

---

Another thing that matters is cohesion. Do the songs feel like a disparate collection drawn together, or are they organically bound together by strong underlying thematic threads? Do they share a sentiment or a feeling?

I think, so far, that they do. And funnily enough, it's not far from the 'Pulp Love Life' sentiment of their last album.

I mean, I think We Love Life was dedicated more towards presenting the gnarlier side of life: 'seamy nature' might be the phrase the grit of the true story of the Weeds, the murder of Minnie Timperley, the decayed love of The Trees, the love-on-the-rocks of Birds, very literal undercurrents below Sheffield in Wickerman, the bitterness of Bad Cover Version, the bereftness of Roadkill, *especially* I Love Life... the only real respite coming only when you "admit that you're a ****up like the rest of us". It's only then that you get Sunrise, isn't it?

These songs, so far, carry on in that vein: much as This Is Hardcore flows organically into We Love Life - and obviously the album isn't out yet, so a MAHOOSIVE pinch of salt is needed with me saying this but so far, it feels like there's a continuity. These are songs, I think, about the necessity of love, the necessity of life, the necessity of feeling and acting and doing things.

Spike Island is about realising you need to 'come alive' again - 'I was born to perform, it's a calling'; Got To Have Love which lyrically is all about the necessity of true authentic feeling otherwise 'you're just jerking off inside someone else', arguing that only love can 'bring you back to life'; Slow Jam, in its Jarv Is form, bemoans 'when love slows down' amid a conversation with Jesus, then Background Noise responds that you only realise the true worth of your love when it's on the rocks, that 'you only notice when it disappears', that it's the strength of the feeling that matters, and invokes JC again: 'Jesus Christ now, what a feeling'.

'The Hymn of the North', truly stunning, starts with a lovely verse: 'Factories lie empty / Manufacturing emptiness / Life still needs to be filled nonetheless' - as Jarvis urges the subject to 'go and find something to love'. Farmers Market discusses the importance of pursuing what really matters - 'Hold on, are these groceries really that important? More important than getting your number and finding out who you really are?'- and concludes that you need to pursue authentic experience - 'Ain't it time we started living'?

What was it Jarvis said at Glastonbury 1995? "You can't buy feelings and you can't buy anything worth having." 'A Sunset', which concludes the album, has lyrics which are about that notion. A beautiful sunset can't be bought, but anyone can enjoy it, can't they?

There's this one thread that keeps appearing in the lyrics, this one sentiment Jarvis keeps repeating: "it's just a feeling":

Spike Island
It's a guess, no idea
It's a feeling
Not a voice, in my head
Just a feeling

Background Noise
What brought me back
Just a hunch, just an inkling, just a feeling
Force of habit, a compromise, a failure
But I've got this feeling

Got to Have Love
It's time to come to your senses

Farmers Market
Ain't it time we started feeling?
Ain't it time we started feeling?
Ain't it time we started feeling?

In other words: might the album be about a FEELING CALLED LOVE? (I mean, in Got to Have Love, he even spells out 'L O V E'...)

I think the songs we've heard thus far are often about rejecting commodified experiences, distractions, minutiae and other gubbins in favour of opening yourself up to feeling. That the internal is more tangible than other stuff. And it's very crucial and to some extent even desperate! The urgency of Got to Have Love, or the songs that Background Noise calls back to - not just First Time? but also there's flickers of OU in there ('Got on the train, it started to rain / I started to think about being single again / I got off at the first station'). Maybe there isn't a specificity, but the lyrics are kind of, I don't know, painting from a palette that we can recognise.

Even in 'My Sex', Jarvis's sex evades description, it can't be pinned down in that way. It's authentic and it's internal, that's how he feels the authenticity. (Maybe reaching here. I think My Sex is probably more just about shagging? Deliciously so)

What a premature analysis of an unreleased album where the lyrics might yet have changed! But still, whatever. I wonder if that's the core conceit of the album: the necessity of feeling, and of opening yourself up to it and embracing that in a world where so often we're numbed into nonparticipation, in a 'contactless society' - to continue, as Pulp have, to keep on living and loving and feeling...

So, in conclusion? I don't think the album will feel disparate or disunified or cobbled-together. A very strong 'hook' seems to already be emerging, although as I said earlier, we'll definitely have to wait to hear the whole album.

-- Edited by lipglossed on Sunday 27th of April 2025 01:16:18 AM

---

 

I might be wrong but I'm sure in some press or interview after the album announcement saying the lyrics concerned them more with his feelings more than previous records (again happy to be wrong on this but I seem to remember).

Which is a really nice running theme - as you've nailed here @lipglossed - and in reply to another post I earlier saw, I do wonder how many songs were written for this thing.

Other than the handful that were written previously for various other projects, did they just write enough to add to those to make up an album, or were other tracks written during this seemingly fertile period of songwriting for the band? Did they whittle through a bigger number and land on the album tracklist as it is, or did they simply write and compile the record from the tracklist we see before us?

Hopefully we get some answers in the future. They were always a band to have a lot of leftover material as history has shown, but part of me isn't sure there's another 7 or 8 tunes sitting there that didn't make this record given the swift time it took to make.

-- Edited by legohairjordan on Thursday 1st of May 2025 09:16:08 PM