My relationship with Oasis' music, has been, at best, apathetic. Mild dislike perhaps with some of it, but generally not that bothered by it. I get what is catchy about it, I get what people can see in it to relate to, and I get why it is popular. I even get what some might have considered 'fresh' (eventhough in itself there is nothing original there) about it. Eventhough, most of the time, that is down to their own lack of breadth and depth. Like anyone that says they were a breath of fresh air in a dire decade, clearly isn't someone that spent any real time listening to music in that time period, but got hooked on an easy hook. But as music, it doesn't move me in any way. It also, as music, in no way annoys me.
My relationship with Oasis - the culture, has been, not good. I have no time for it and find the hype and overrating irritating. As I do the dogmatic need to convert everyone.
My relationship with Oasis fans and fanbase, has been even worse. Irreparable perhaps. To the point, that it has taken significant effort, and being on here exposed to some level headed fans I respect, just to soften enough be able to swallow an immediate sense of disappointment in someone that says they are an Oasis fan. That is one broad brush do wave, I get that. But that has been my experience, and in the same way that people who have found something in them to resonate with, think I can't understand what it means to them, I think it is hard for others to understand what that means to me. If we accept for example footballing tribalism, and I happen to have the same innate prejudice that takes time and alternative exposure to erode at.
It is then impossible for me, to separate those two things from the experience of listening to their music or to attempt to take it at face value. Hence this was always going to be a struggle. Noel's album I could just about convince myself there was Some difference, but with this, it is impossible. I gave it a good shot, managed two whole listens. Won't be doing a third. Don't feel I need to either, it is simplistic enough to get everything out of it, and it is well known anyway, not like it is my first time hearing it.
The music itself is what I thought and expected. Fine. What it has made me appreciate, is that as their debut, their intentions would have been good. Honest guys trying something they felt like. It is not their fault, the phenomenon they would become, and the fanbase they would attract. And they do know how to write a pop song. And pass it off well as rock and roll. Just like the Beatles, which is why the comparisons are there. It has aged well. Partly, because it was always basic enough, and partly because there aren't that many gimmicks in it.
My relationship with Oasis - the culture, has been, not good. I have no time for it and find the hype and overrating irritating. As I do the dogmatic need to convert everyone.
My relationship with Oasis fans and fanbase, has been even worse. Irreparable perhaps. To the point, that it has taken significant effort, and being on here exposed to some level headed fans I respect, just to soften enough be able to swallow an immediate sense of disappointment in someone that says they are an Oasis fan. That is one broad brush do wave, I get that. But that has been my experience, and in the same way that people who have found something in them to resonate with, think I can't understand what it means to them, I think it is hard for others to understand what that means to me. If we accept for example footballing tribalism, and I happen to have the same innate prejudice that takes time and alternative exposure to erode at.
It is then impossible for me, to separate those two things from the experience of listening to their music or to attempt to take it at face value. Hence this was always going to be a struggle. Noel's album I could just about convince myself there was Some difference, but with this, it is impossible. I gave it a good shot, managed two whole listens. Won't be doing a third. Don't feel I need to either, it is simplistic enough to get everything out of it, and it is well known anyway, not like it is my first time hearing it.
The music itself is what I thought and expected. Fine. What it has made me appreciate, is that as their debut, their intentions would have been good. Honest guys trying something they felt like. It is not their fault, the phenomenon they would become, and the fanbase they would attract. And they do know how to write a pop song. And pass it off well as rock and roll. Just like the Beatles, which is why the comparisons are there. It has aged well. Partly, because it was always basic enough, and partly because there aren't that many gimmicks in it.
Last edited: