You've Been Asleep for a Hundred Seconds

Monday, July 19, 2004

1995 Redux

This weekend I watched the documentary Live Forever, which is about the Brit Pop explosion of the mid-1990s. It was a pretty solid film but there was one really interesting quote in the film from British critic Andy Savage to the effect that Oasis became more popular than Blur because they had more heart. My initial reaction was no way that dude is crazy but upon further reflection Savage may be right. Oasis's songs definitely have a hopeful you-and-me-against-the-world quality that Blur tends to lack. Blur's songs tend to be more analytical and reflective especially in their earlier work. Later Blur albums are considerably more emotional. Blur is still a better band in my book but Oasis is a more positive band.


At 7/19/2004 11:51 AM, Blogger sprizee said...

I liked Oasis' debut album enough when it first came out (although I still don't know what the hell a wonderwall is!) but now I put them in the same category as Third Eye Blind when I hear them on the radio. Not a good place to be because, of course, that category is change the channel.

It's clear we weren't seperated at birth. Our musical tastes at time have been known to get into nasty brawls with kicking and biting and sometimes even a hair tug or two.

At 7/19/2004 2:09 PM, Blogger Headstart For Happiness said...

Blur is way more cerebral, which is, I guess, why I like them more personally. I can definitely see Savage's point. "Tender" from 13 is the first song I can think of that has a more emotional pull and heart to it, which isn't to say that Blur hasn't written some beautiful pop songs.

Sprizee, you would like some Blur songs, I think! I should make you a mix.


Post a Comment

<< Home