Imagine, in your mind, right now, just what 19 million CDs, stacked one on top of the other, in countless piles across a floor that rolls over a distant horizon, would look like. This is how many copies of (What’s The Story) Morning Glory that have been taken from shop shelve to home stereo. Blur may have won the famous singles battle of 1995, with their ‘Country House’ beating ‘Roll With It’ to the top spot (still a sticky subject with old Creation folk), but ultimately Oasis have proved to be the band of the people over the last 13 years. They are recognised by the Guinness Book Of World Records as the most successful band of the last decade.
But just why have Oasis proved so enduringly popular? As their key songwriter, Noel Gallagher, turned 40 earlier this week, an entire nation of twenty-somethings sighed with the realisation that old age was encroaching; the recklessness and naivety of youth is sliding away. The heroes of teenage days and nights are turning the corner into and beyond middle age; the rock still rocks, granted, but just what are we rolling with these days, and why?
Oasis were always designed with popularity in mind – never did the member-fluctuating five-piece claim obscure acts as influences, openly proclaiming their affection for The Beatles, The Kinks and The Rolling Stones. They came from where you and I did, weren’t glamorous nor artsy, and wrote songs that spoke to men and women to be, to the kids and teens of the Tories’ end-of-days. Fists aloft and grins wide, beers spilling and terrace chants. There were no lyrics printed in the sleeve of 1994’s debut album Definitely Maybe, but its songs were immediately embraced as sing-along affairs. ‘Cigarettes And Alcohol’, ‘Supersonic’, ‘Rock ‘n’ Roll Star’ – these were songs – chooons if you must – that encapsulated an era; an era of bright futures but barely tolerable presents, rebellion and lies and the embracing of a political climate on the rise. Noel and Tony and Alan pressing palms at Number 10: everything seemed so perfect as the mid ‘90s trickled and dripped and France ‘98’ed into the almost-millennium.
Just as Oasis were magpies on the prowl for what wasn’t theirs to adapt and exploit for musical gain, a rash of imitators followed in the band’s wake, and continue to do so even today. Liam Gallagher alone has been semi-responsible for the relative success of myriad cocky frontman-led acts – The Twang, Kasabian, The Verve, Hurricane #1, Terris, et cetera, these are (and were) acts dominated by a singer with forced attitude, lifted wholesale from Liam (don’t give me any Ian Brown bollocks – the man was a shadow of what Liam was at his peak). Of course, they paled in comparison to the man himself, though – the reason why Liam Gallagher continues to be admired and aped is because through his variously-rimmed lenses his eyes burn with a raging I mean it honesty. The man is, one suspects, too simple to not believe what he considers his truth, which is a simple and pure one. His brother may have originally written the words, but every syllable of ‘Rock ‘n’ Roll Star’ was finally forged in the fires of Liam’s belly. He got what he wanted because it’s all he ever believed in. He’s a rock ‘n’ roll star because of a determination that no imitators have accurately replicated.
But, returning to the point of DiScussion: just why have Oasis proved so evergreen? Although their last long-player Don’t Believe The Truth exists in the commercial shadow of much that preceded its release, it’s still shifted around three million copies worldwide, if not more. The album was the band’s first to not be dominated by Noel, with songwriting duties split between members. The move essentially reinvigorated the band, and a succession of positive reviews followed. It was compared, oddly enough, to the Noel-helmed Definitely Maybe, and widely summarised as a return to form. But is it nostalgia that’s stroked the fires of Oasis appreciate once more, a homesickness of sorts for comforting surroundings and circumstances – the band is now in its sixteenth year, and is an act that many music-savvy individuals grew up on – or are they genuinely a force to be reckoned with today? The follow-up to Don’t Believe The Truth is out next year, and a Noel solo album’s in the pipeline – the next twelve months could, conceivably, well and truly make or completely and finally break a band that so many love to hate and far more hate admitting they love.
Happy birthday then, Noel. Those 19 million albums you’ve sold – and that’s not counting five of your six albums! – have set you up for life, but it’s good to see you’re ploughing onwards and, hopefully, upwards; you still, I’m sure, mean it just as much as your kid brother. Sure, you did once say that you wished Damon Albarn would “catch AIDS and die”, but at least you took it back. Good man. You didn’t like Michael Hutchence (“Has-beens shouldn't be presenting awards to gonna-bes,” I believe were your words), but even you know it’s wrong to speak ill of the dead. And we applaud you for your reactions and retractions. Still.
DiScuss: With Oasis entering middle age, both personally and professionally, just how relevant are they in today’s musical make-up? Do you envisage them lasting for another 16 years, or transforming into a Rolling Stones-style mega-touring money-making machine? Do you still hold Oasis in a special place in your heart? Did you, like me, spend hours and hours digesting (What’s The Story) Morning Glory (on cassette, no less, purchased from a French shop on the way to the Alps), alongside The Bends and Different Class as a kid, and wish you still felt so excited by today’s indie exponents? Does Noel turning 40 make you feel old at all? It does me…
Oasis are shite
End of discussion
true
^^
This
...
Trut So Pure.
They are to music as My Family is to comedy.
Fine Article
One of the finest bands in the history of popular music.
The reasons for their longevity? Well, in my humble opinion -
They've been a formative component of many people's childhood/adolescence and as the sparkplug for igniting their love of music.
They've continued to produce work that, while eminently unfashionable, still demands attention.
As cliched as it sounds, they mean it, maaan.
bf
meh
it's nice to see an article that actually gives oasis credit
i'm not so sure about oasis' relevance now...i think it's difficult for all bands who are 16 years into their career to still be considered important.
yeah they still trade off past achivements/albums, but i reckon each album that comes along has a few gems on it, so i suppose they're still entitled to a place in the current music scene.
I
saw Noel on telly a little while back going on about how many drugs they used to do, and how 'all these pop stars going into rehab or getting addicted were lightweights' etc. That might be true, but he sounded just like Rod Stewart, who happened to be sat next to him.
The moral of the story? Oasis are dinosaurs in exactly the same way as Rod, the Stones, Elton, etc.
RE: "He got what he wanted because it’s all he ever believed in."
As soon as Oasis got what they wanted they lost everything that made them great.
The first two records are brilliant.
^ this, maybe ^
But then, why not stop?
Because they were oblivious to things
It was that lack of self-awareness that was appealing wasn't it? That made Liam seem more 'real' than the rest?
And if it's all you ever believed in...
It's the hardest thing, to cut something off in its prime.
Every Oasis album
documents a key period in the life of a classic rock'n'roll band. I wouldn't be without any of 'em. Even Heathen Chemistry.
Bollocks.
You ain't got a clue.
Feel old?
I am old, but seriously, I don't think age should come into the equation. It's an ongoing stereotype re-inforced by reality television programmes such as 'Popstars' that no one over the age of 24 should be allowed to make "popular" or "populist" music.
The irony of this is that the people making these rules are well into their 50s!
Likewise, does that mean that when someone turns 30 they should only be allowed to shop for music in Tesco and promptly redirected to the Phil Collins and Elton John sections, and anyone of this age group that dare mention the words "Battles" or "Foals" have their bus passes taken off them immediately?
Granted, there has to be a constant flow of new talent emerging regularly but let's no forget quality control needs to be in place here as much as it does for the oldies trying to recapture their youth and failing, badly (see the recent Manics album as one example).
As for the continued relevance of Oasis. In terms of influencing bands they'll be omnipresent in my view as the people who influenced them have been. Musically, it all depends on their next record I suppose, but live they are still one of the most exciting acts in the UK.
Feeling Older Every Day
As someone who was 15 when those 3 records Mike mentions came out, I can well and truly empathise with his feelings and the fact that someone whose job it is to care about music finds it hard to replicate those feelings of adoration he felt for records such as What's The Story, The Bends and Different Class.
Maybe it's the fact that at 15 you're at the stage where you are really forming your taste, but I also long for the albums that you can just listen to over and over again, albums that stay with you and that you never tire of hearing. There's obviously loads of good music out there but is there much you can do that with.
Maybe it's the choice you get with iPods that also plays a part...
By the way, there are 3 great Oasis albums. Check out 'The Masterplan' to see just how productive Noel was for just over 2 years and how many tracks he pissed away as B-Sides...
I'm impressed - good article.
And brave also, what with the vast majority of folks on here being h8terz (in public at least).
I like them...probably more for the way they wind 'real music' fans up, than their music nowadays, but that'll do me.
oasis
oasis still relevant? Of course. Stop the Clocks shoulda never been released. It just caused people to start looking back over their career when in fact, their last last album was their best in 8 years or so. There were some fantastic tunes on DBTT and unlike most other oasis albums, I haven't played it to death so a lot of it still sounds fresh.
I did feel a little gutted at Noel turning 40... 40 is suddenly old. Do I wanna be hearing music from a 40 year old mutli millionaire?
Lookin forward to their next album. Obivously I won't hold my breath for anything as life changing as their first two, but i'm sure it'll be enjoyable and the PR campaign surrounding the album should be entertaining too.
also
i'd rather listen to Oasis than the utter shite being churned out currently by 80% of 'nme' bands.
to paraphrase Noel himself, 'will people still be listening to Klaxons in 10 years?'
capture, release
^ this
Good article.
The world would be a much duller place without Liam and Noel. They are rock'n'roll.
I would appreciate
it if the Media did not report on every time noel or liam fart, please.
Great article Mike
i think now
oasis are no better than the bands that imitate them, but at a time when i started listening to music, they were the most exciting band to listen to. They had passion for what they were doing and looked like they really 'meant it' but by the time the 3rd album came round they were losing that. Now i dont own or listen to any oasis albums, ive moved on, i think noel should too.
"They came from where you and I did, weren’t glamorous nor artsy, and wrote songs that spoke to men
this is precisely what pisses me off about all these bands, primarily those who have been influenced by oasis' spiel--or the press machine around oasis's spiel: the appeal to the common man. there *is* no common man. there are cultural factors, some historical, some self-perpetuated, that bring some people together, and push other people apart. and so, yes, 19 million people around the world bought the album, and perhaps some of them independently came to the decision that the gallagher brothers' music and lyrics resonated with them--spoke to them!--rather than, say, being swayed by endless media hyperbole about how oasis are the next big thing, how they're in touch with the common man, how they really, you know, speak to us.... but so what? i don't like oasis, hardly anyone i knows like oasis. they have no relevance to our lives--and we are no less ordinary as a result.
"these were songs – chooons if you must – that encapsulated an era; an era of bright futures but barely tolerable presents, rebellion and lies and the embracing of a political climate on the rise."
an era that also saw commercial success being handed on a plate to bon jovi, wet wet wet, take that, celine dion, the beautiful south, simply red, and robson & jerome (...!). what exactly did *they* encapsulate?
They were the figurehead
of a 'movement' (if you must) that saw 'indie' music riding high in the charts, at the awards ceremonies, and on the news. Which, as a 15 year-old (ish) around that time, was tremendously exciting. Seeing your 'mums music' knocked off the top of the charts by the supposed alternative, which for the five years before that had made no higher than 27 in the charts thanks to EMF and the Inspiral Carpets (no disrespect to either), was brilliant.
I appear to have gone
quotation mark crazy. 'Sorry'.
You just straw-manned
the ass off this article. The original point wasn't that it spoke to some notion of a 'common man;' indeed, nowhere do I see that phrase in the article itself. It's more the down-to-earth lyrics (although admittedly they veered off this course after the first album) and the feeling of 'the new' that they brought in.
You can be unpretentious and/or fresh-sounding without having to invoke as dodgy a concept as a 'common man.'
okay, i'll quote it again
"they came from where you and I did, weren’t glamorous nor artsy, and wrote songs that spoke to men and women to be, to the kids and teens of the Tories’ end-of-days."
who's this "you and i" if not some sort of common man? i'm sorry to repeat such a stupid and cloying phrase so often--particularly, as you say, it wasn't actually in the article--but that's what it seems to invoke, and it's what a lot of journalists writing about the twang, the view, etc. recently have invoked too.
They still have a special place in my heart
As I was 14/15 when Definitely Maybe and Morning Glory came out, and was just properly getting into music.
I think if I had reached that age a couple of years later, say when Be Here Now was released, I wouldn't see what the fuss was about. For me it's a time and place thing. Those albums (and Different Class, The Bends and Parklife) will always remind me of being that age and having a great time.
^basically this
just a more manly version of it. I was 15/16 when Definitely Maybe and Morning Glory came out and it was an exciting time. Despite the dirges they've come up with since, I still have time for the first two albums and the odd songs after those.
You can't be serious
"Liam Gallagher alone has been semi-responsible for the relative success of..." the others i agree with but The Verve?
They were around way before and were always a very different band, especially earlier on. You wouldn't have seen Noel et al creating a album anywhere near as good as A Storm In Heaven which is a underrated british psychadelic masterpeice imho.
Remember, it was Oasis who supported The Verve early on.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mugglewump has a point.
'A Storm In Heaven' (and 'Northern Soul' for that matter) drizzle lime green urine from a height over anything that came afterwards, and as the man says, were basically written by a different band (member) by and large.
A storm in heaven is the epitome of the
'yeah, (insert massively-popular-to-the-mainstream album) is ok but (insert the band's debut/not heard by most sun readers album) is far better etc etc....' - complex, which plagues muso hangouts the length and breadth of the country. For the most part, a storm in heaven is a big pile of self-indulgent wanknoise.
This is true, but...
The Verve's rise to the position they enjoyed circa Urban Hymns has a lot to do with the public's fondness for Gallagher's attitude, which they saw heaps of in ol' Dickie. You've got to admit: if you were 15, 16 at the time, you got into the Verve through Bittersweet Symphony and THAT video... which was Liam through and through.
Yeah
Thats kinda true Mike, and I take that point. I just couldn't let you intimate that the only reason the verve got anywhere is because of that idiot liam!
I would imagine they found a much larger fanbase by association, but also that plenty of music lovers got into them on the strength of said music alone.
Especially early on as I mentioned.
Obviosuly I fucking love Storm in Heaven, Already There is simply PERFECT. mmmm
I got into them through
Slide Away. I must be some sort of strange exception.
It was All In The Mind
that did it for me, and also seeing them blow Smashing Pumpkins offstage at Rock City in 93 or 94.
look
look how many people have responded to this piece already, that is testimony to the importance of oasis. even now they get people talking, love them or hate them, eveyone has an opinion. First two albums are great, all the early bsides are great and the rest is patchy, still great live. Also noel and Liam are comedy gold.
True
they are comedy gold and probably still two of the best interviewees around, even when just in slagging off mode. Noel usually comes across as intellegent and funny.
Good to see that the reponses aren't all "oasis are sh!t". This is a good piece and actually gives them credit. The first two albums were great, but then went off the rails a bit.
Still have led to two of the most bobbins bands around at the moment, twang & kasabian.
A reasonable summary
...apart from the fact that even half of the second album is rubbish, a fact acknowledged by almost all of the reviews at the time and swiftly forgotten when it sold tons of copies. Presumably because continuing to speak ill of something so overridingly popular is like saying "please stop reading our magazine, thanks".
Seriously
Hello - pointless
Wonderwall - dirge
She's Electric - like Digsy's Dinner, but even more pointless
Champagne Supernova - overblown and preposterous.
Don't Look Back In Anger - one of the worst songs ever written.
Roll With It - don't get me started.
The rest of it's not bad.
Seriously
Hello - tune
Wonderwall - tune
She's Electric - tune
Champagne Supernova - tune
Don't Look Back In Anger - tune
Roll With It - tune
The rest of it's a load more tunes.
The truth
I really thought I was the only person that thought this! Wonderwall is nigh-on unlistenable, it's a horrible horrible vocal. Be Here Now is a better album as long as you enjoy it for what it is - some very rich people pissing about off their faces on coke. There's no excuse for What's The Story, it's just not very good.
this was going to be my comment
yes, The Verve - anyone who saw them play Camden Town Hall in 1992 knows it...
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=verve+camden+town+hall&search=Search
as for Oasis
they benefitted greatly from a whole host of indie bands immediately preceeding them who laid the groundwork for the UK to embrace(ahem) a popular champion to come through the ranks and provide singalong rock and roll for the radio and TV
so, for a lot of people those first two albums mark an important set of memories in their lives and rightly so - that's the power of popular music whether it's million selling stadium rock megastars or one hit wonders you always open a whole sack of associations when you hear THAT tune that was on the radio THAT summer and the good times come flooding back
For me personally, Noel's crowning moment in that sense was Chemical Brother's Setting Suns
Can't knock the lad - he's done well but I can't help thinking that a large proportion of the indie snobbery you get nowadays comes from the fact that Oasis went so big and invited a load of people to the party that were there for the love of beer and fags rather than for the tunes
...
"A Storm In Heaven ... a underrated british psychadelic masterpeice imho"
Definitely :-)
I remember playing it to a bunch of pals around the time that Urban Hymns was massive and watching the confusion spread.
They were confused in a good way, though.
Which was nice.
Hahaha
excellent!
Ah, I loved seeing Oasis gigs ten years ago
They released a greatest hits album in 1994. Unfortunately they've kept releasing records since, tarnishing their reputation somewhat. Like they care.
Oasis were the first band I ever saw
They used to hold a special place in my ickle heart, but their leaden shiteness and unwillingness to even dabble in originality is just too much.
Legends
I guess Oasis had a charm about them for me when I was 15 or so in a way that i guess the artic monkeys (now) or the streets (5 years ago) have appealed to their respective generation of wide eyed teenagers.
It seems like a simple formula.....lots of cultural references, having a 'fuck you' attitude and the simplest of musical hooks.
I have just grown out of any of that appealing to me.
I KNEW that definately maybe was the greatest record ever made when i was 15 becuase I had the perspective of a spotty little 15 year old. Now i listen to it with a head full of memories, smile and say "what a great record this really is". In reality if it was realeased to today i would offer it the same distain that i show the artics or the twang. It is full of rehashed ideas, obvious cliche and just utterly dull. Songs about cigarettes and alcohol are pretty damn sexy when you are 15....but at 28? just cringeworthy.
Oasis were, are and will always be a load of old shit.
Oasis are legends in their own mind
Yeah, of course, the first two albums were rather great...but not that great. Good pleasant indie stompers, eh?
I frankly never saw Blur vs. Oasis thing being relevant. I mean, Blur had talent. Oasis were just popular.
And the bad news for Oasis is that in the long run talent trumps popularity. Sure, Oasis will be remembered as "britpop" but it'll be Parklife you'll be listening to.
...
Sorry oceanRain but, 10 years after Britpop, I know of nobody who listens to Blur's mid-90's albums. Everyone still digs out Definitely Maybe and Morning Glory from time to time and I can't see that situation changing.
.
well i can't speak for the masses but i certainly revisit Leisure, MOdern life and Parklife a whole lot more than Oasis albums...... for me they stand the test of time a lot better
In other words,
some people prefer Blur, some people prefer Oasis. One thing we can be sure of, both Blur and Oasis piss on At The Drive-In from a great height.
back are you?
and still as wrong as ever, have you seriously not formed any new opinions in the last year or so?
same
here
Oasis were never indie or Britpop.
They were, are and always will be a rock'n'roll band. They survived the death of Britpop and they transcend the snobby, elitist, up-its-own-arse world of shambling indie.
You're spouting shite. As per.
Micky Loosefit :D
Survived the death of Britpop? Blur's last album came out in what, 2003, way past the end of Britpop. Albarn actually had the creativity and the open-mindedness to pursue his project in Morocco and then to form Gorillaz.
Oasis's first two albums aren't bad but they didn't grow up and just ploughed a one-dimensional furrow.
You're 28
and you still like At The Drive-In? Now that is embarrassing. I saw through all that sub-MC5, shouty, tuneless, overly-pretentious, try-hard shite when I was 24.
You find songs about cigs & alcohol cringeworthy? I find songs that contain utterly meaningless but supposedly deeply meaningful lyrics like...
"a vivid dissection that mocked the strut of vivisection semi-automatic colonies and a silencing that still walks the streets in the company of wolves was a stretcher made of cobblestone curfews the federales perform their custodial customs quite well"
...extremely cringeworthy. Frankly, compared to that bad sixth-form beat poetry shite Cigs & Alcohol is positively Shakespearean.
At The Drive-In were, are and always will be a load of old shite listened to by people who think they're cleverer than they actually are. At least us Oasis fans know Supersonic is meaningless. What's your excuse?
...
Hey, Supersonic ain't meaningless ;-)
"I'm feeling supersonic/
Give me gin & tonic"...
How to express feeling "up".
You're right, of course.
I was thinking more about the Elsa/Alka Seltzer bits. But then that's the genius of Noel. Even his meaningless nonsense songs have moments of transcendent clarity and meaning.
...
Ná bath leis, mo deartháir.
?
You dont like At the drive in? um....ok cool
I'm not as keen on Oasis as i once was partly because I grew out of grown men singing ditties about how they just love smoking fags and drinking lots......i guess i just learned to have a greater appreciation of 'semi automatic colonies' and 'cobblestone curfews.
p.s i love your bit about "transcendent clarity and meaning". That was amazing.
I'll never grow out of At The Drive-In...
cos I always thought they were shite.