Talk:Madchester

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rave, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to Rave, Rave music and other various aspects of rave culture. For more information, visit our project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
Peer review Madchester has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Kim Gordon and Thurston Moore of Sonic Youth
Alternative music Portal
This article is part of the Alternative music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the Project's importance scale.
North West England Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greater Manchester , a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Greater Manchester-related articles. In so doing it works and collaborates with its mother project WikiProject UK Geography . If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. (Add assessment comments)
High This article has been rated as high-importance within the Greater Manchester WikiProject.

I changed a bit of this. This page seems to conclude that the Stone Roses were not part of "Madchester" because Factory records coined the term. Much as most of the bands hated this term, in the public consciousness in November 1989, 'Madchester' was the Stone Roses, the Happy Mondays and (bizarrely, with hindsight) the Inspiral Carpets; only one of which was on Factory. New Order/Electronic had nothing to do with 'Madchester', having being putting out records since the '70s/'80s (other than knowing the bands involved and having hit records at the same time). No-one in the UK would have referred to New Order as a 'Madchester' band at that time or since.

-- I changed it back, I have no idea why you continue to class "The Stone Roses" as part of the Madchester scene, they were just a band from Manchester who were there at the wrong place and wrong time as the media were lapping up the drug /acid house culture that was predominate in Manchester clubs. The Roses even tried to distance themselves away from "The Happy Mondays" because the Monday's drug reputation and being part of that scene were beginning to give them a bad rep with the music press. They admired each other but the Roses sure as hell didn't follow that scene. The term "Madchester" is a media-coined phrase used by the media to describe a "style" of music during a certain era. They even used "Britpop" to describe the "style" of many bands who wern't even Britpop at the time, so if you're going to pidgeonhole bands such as either the Roses, the Charlies or (as you've noted) New Order as "Madchester" music, I'm afraid I'm going to have to correct it.

-- The Roses certainly were a very different band from Happy Mondays- but that doesn't mean they both weren't Madchester. The Grateful Dead sound nothing like Jefferson Airplane or Quicksilver Messenger Service, but they're all San Fransisco psychedelic bands. Point is, when you say Madchester to someone, it's a toss-up whether they think of the guitar-rock with a sorta-dance beat thing of the Roses or the acid/house of the Mondays- but people think of both all the time.

That, and the article as is is a hideous contradiction of itself, so it can't stand anyways. The important thing is to note that Madchester is not really a cohesive scene. It's not pigeonholing, it's the reality of how the word is used. Just look at AMG.--Hal 19:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

-- The point isn't how they "sound" though, if we're basing most of these bands on "sound" then we might as well stuff "Madchester" and "Britpop" both together and just coin some universal term for it. The point is that "Madchester" was a term created my the media (Mostly the tabloids and music press) just like they coined the term "Britpop", these are just lazy and uneducated terms given to bands that got popular during that era instead of giving each band their own individual merit which they rightfully deserved. Even James came out around the same time and had the grand indie rock style (and I believe they're from Greater Manchester as well) but you can't exactly class them as part of the "Madchester" scene just because they came out around the same time and came from around the same area. If one thing is for certain The Monday's openly embraced being termed as a "Madchester" band, but if you've got some bands who want nothing to do with the term and express their distate for it, what are you gonna do? Still class them as a "Madchester" band when it's obvious they deserve a bit more credit than that? -- Digital Holocaust

--- PS: Hal, Just wanted to note that your contribution to the article has made it a little more comphehendable rather than shoving numourous indie rock Mancunian bands in there. :D --- Digital Holocaust

--- My basis for changing the article originally was not on whether an individual band thought they "were Madchester" or not, but on what public perception at the time was, as someone else has mentioned. The synopsis of this book on the subject maybe helps: http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1903047803/qid=1125151085/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/026-3256431-8875644

Notably, this book has "Primal Scream" on the cover. Primal Scream are (mostly) from East Kilbride in Scotland, so not even a Manchester connection here (at least, in 1990 well before Mani joined); however, in the summer of 1990 they had some big hits of a similar sound, so I guess that explains why they are included in this book. It's not an exact science this, but I'd lay money on it that if they asked "Name a Madchester Band" on Family Fortunes, than the Stone Roses and the Happy Mondays would be the two top answers. MetalMickey 14:03, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Can I also point out that perhaps one's perception of this may differ hugely depending on where you were at the time... This was much bigger news in the UK than it was in (for example) the US. I suspect the US view of this "scene" may have been more Factory-centric because Tony Wilson went there in the summer of 1990 to do some talking to the record industry. In my recollection, this wasn't the same here. Perhaps someone from the US can confirm or deny. MetalMickey 14:06, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Here's a quote from David Luck's book "The Madchester Scene", from a chapter entitled "The Big Two".

While it's hard to pin down who was and who wasn't down with Madchester, there's no dispute over the acts that are most commonly associated with the scene: The Stone Roses and Happy Mondays. MetalMickey 09:10, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

You said yourself that - "Notably, this book has "Primal Scream" on the cover. Primal Scream are (mostly) from East Kilbride in Scotland, so not even a Manchester connection here" and thus it kinda cancels out anything the book has to say and kind of makes it an unreliable source. The Roses don't like to be associated to the Madchester scene so I feel it's okay to leave them out of it and just give them a "honourable mention" just as Hal has done. -- Digital Holocaust

But it's not right to do that, surely! Just because the Roses wouldn't want to be associated with Madchester (I agree that this is probably the case); however, Nixon doesn't like being associated with Watergate, but that doesn't mean one should edit that out of an article about him! MetalMickey 22:52, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] vandalism

82.34.113.18 has been listed on "vandalism in progress" and should be banned soon. good luck. Mat-C 22:06, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Planning to expand

I am planning to edit this article, since I think it deserves more detail. This won't be an overnight process, but I thought I'd announce it - I don't want to be seen as just trampling on others' work. Anyone watching the article, please feel free to comment on edits as they happen. --Vjam 13:06, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

So far so good! Edwardian 19:17, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Indeed - much better MetalMickey 00:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Madchester

That sure is one mad Chester! ROFL!!!!!!

(JK, as long as his name isn't Chester, and he's not mad.) --Shultz 07:20, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Stone Roses

Both http://www.thestoneroses.co.uk/discography/albums/thestoneroses.asp and the Album's article list the release date of The Stone Roses as March 1989 but the article listed it as April so I've edited it Rob89 21:30, 8th April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Baggy and the Charlatans

I think its fair to say that non Manchester bands like the Charlatans and Ocean Colour Scene evolved as part of the baggy scene, the smiths weren't really baggy more Goth, well they were in my school anyway. The Charlatans actually formed not long after the Roses and evolved alongside them in the Midlands as oposed to being influenced by them and even if they were slightly influenced by the Roses, it would have been before Madchester for sure, I think the press tried to lump the Charlatans in with this scene but Tim Burgess (the only northerner in the band until 1991 was on record as saying he didn't want to be associated with the Madchester scene... afterall, he grew up in Northwich and the band evolved in the west mids before he joined. I have a single from Ocean Colour scene from 1990 and it sounds nothing like Madchester, more Blur and Charlatans. IMO the Madchester scene was the hype around the hacienda, gun crime, happy modays, excstacy and most importantly... The Stone Roses who were miles above the whole scene, maybe there is an argument for the Stone Roses influencing the Baggy Scene? That would be more credible, but Madchester was a scene invented by the press and record labels of that time so as to enable mega compilations. Nick Boulevard 23:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Nick. I've reverted you're editing out of the Charlatans. As you rightly say, Madchester was largely a media invention. However, this does mean that you have to go along with what the media invented, whether you agree with what that was or not. And, for anyone who remembers the era and read the press at the time, the Charlatans were most definitely a part of the Madchester scene. You can see this, for example, from the NME cover pictured towards the top of the article. IMO, the fact that Tim Burgess is on record as distancing himself from Madchester is pretty much conclusive proof that he was part of it. You don't get Blur saying things like that, because it would make no sense at all.
PS Please make your case here and try to get other people's opinions before re-editing. Thanks.

--Vjam 17:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Vjam, thanks for discussing here, sorry I contacted you on your talk page... ignore that and continue here.
You have a good point and I thought about it as I edited out Charlatans actually, maybe they should remain in the article but state that they weren't from Manchester and that becasue they appeared at around the same time as the Stone Roses the press decided to mancunianise them :) for want of better word, and also keep in the article how the band wished NOT to be labelled (not just as mancunian) but as anything other than The Charlatans. thanks Nick Boulevard 00:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the claim that the Charlatans were influenced by the Inspiral carpets Farfisa sound, for a start Rob Collins gave the Charlatans their keyboard sound which was a Hammond (different sound) and his influences are clearly stated here: http://www.thecharlatans.info/members.htm Nick Boulevard 10:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Nick. I still think you're clarifications about the Charlatans are overlong for this article. I also think it's going off on a tangent to focus too much on band members' views (arguably more relevent to an article on The Charlatans). The article as it stands now has 18 lines meandering around the questions of the Charlatans' Madchester credentials compared to 3 on the Spike Island concert.
The bit starting "There were several..." is a bit misleading. The Charlatans were really the only band from outside Greater Manchester to be considered part of the scene, not one of several. The band did not emerge prior to Madchester - Tim Burgess didn't even join until right at the end of 1989, and they didn't release anything before 1990. They emerged, most definitely, as part of the Madchester scene, playing support slots for the Stone Roses. --Vjam 11:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi Vj, sorry for late reply, are you basing this on personal experience or do you have a source to cite on this info re Charlies please? You are probably right about too much info about them but from my own experiences they seemed to be more from a midland background, inspired by generally a "baggy" or "indie" scene which from my memory was not just Manchester although Manchester played a big role mainly through the Stone Roses and Mondays, the Inspirals were from Oldham not Manchester though.
If this is Greater Manchester thing is to be applied to other cities it could get quite confusing? i.e. Pop Will Eat Itself, The Specials, Neds Atomic Dustbin, Slade, Wonderstuff and so on all existed within a ten or 15 mile radius of Birmingham and they were obviously influenced by Brum with bands like the Specials writing about New Street Station etc. I think this is relates to my point about Madchester being largely a press thing again, should we make this more prevelant in the article? The Brum beat scene from the 60's was mainly an underground thing that came more into focus in later years with bands like Led Zep, Sabbath, Move, E.L.O., Moody Blue's reaping the rewards from a similar scene to that of Manchester in the late 80's, thanks Nick Boulevard 22:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Nick. I think the main thing I want to say about this is to reinforce that it is not up to us to decide on criteria for whether a particular band belongs in the article or not, since that was done by music journos and others over 15 years ago. Inspiral Carpets and the Charlatans were part of it because everyone says so, and so its not really appropriate to question it. Camparing to other cities misses the point - there was never any such scene as "Brumchester", for example (although not a bad name for one if you ask me).--Vjam 15:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello, yes I agree that Charlies should be here in the context of how the media portrayed them BUT... seeing as wikipedia is based on fact, the facts were that in the fans hearts in Manchester the band were mancunian, but in the fans hearts in the bands home region they were a West Midland band associated with the Baggy/Madchester scene, this is backed up by the band interviews as I have said, they weren't the Stone Roses from Machester, that role was already filled. In most of the minds of the fans that I know from South Wales to Midlands they are a Midlands band Vjam. This should be portrayed in the article, please think of a way of including this or I can have another go :) Nick Boulevard 23:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to be pedantic but.. "the Charlatans were part of it because everyone says so" is clearly not the case, hence why I am making comment as many others would possibly have read the article and thought "this is written by someone from the N.M.E. in 1992 Nick Boulevard 23:24, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Nick. To the extent that "Madchester" was a media-led thing, you are wrong. Journalists decided who was and wasn't part of Madchester, and trying to revise that would be against Wikipedia policy, because it would be Orginal Research. A similar case would be if someone argued that reference to North Korea should be taken out of the article on "Axis of Evil" because, they felt, it wasn't really that evil. You can't do that - George W Bush coined the phrase, and it means what he said it means. --Vjam 10:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black Grape

Shouldn't Black Grape be mentioned in this article? 96T 10:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Black Grape's first LP came out in 1995, which is well past the timeframe for this article. They could arguably be mentioned in a "what Shaun Ryder did next" way, but then if you did that with everyone it would be adding quite a lot to the article - if people wanted to know they could always click on his wikilink. --Vjam 12:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stone Roses

What's all this debate about whether the Stone Roses were "Madchester"? Surely the Stone Roses, together with the Happy Mondays, defined the scene that came to be known as Madchester. I should know, I was there.

I'd agree with this, [1] is a youtube vid purporting to be of them at the Hacienda in 1985. The hairstyles would suggest so! They were very much part of the scene. And here is a link to the Late Show "amateurs!" incident in full, what is the best way to link, in the footnotes? It's informative of the Madchester style and then so funny that I'd love it to go next to the description in the article, meaning as many as possible get to see it. Also "live on television for the first time" --82.15.46.131 23:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I've read the debate at the top of this page re The Stone Roses: Are They Madhcester? I followed this scene as a London teenager and, as someone else has said, thought of The Happy Mondays, Stone Roses and Inspiral Carpets as being the big hitters. It would seem nonsensical to me to leave The Stone Roses out and I'm very unhappy about the 'distancing' sentence that currently exists near the top of the article where The Roses are listed.
If the bad distanced themselves, let's say that. But whether they like it or not, they are and will always be regarded as part of the madchester scene. --bodnotbod 15:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:The Stone Roses Profile.jpg

Image:The Stone Roses Profile.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC) ---

DiscographyI'm pretty sure that Pills n Thrills and Kinky Afro came out in about September / October 1990 86.145.38.127 22:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Madchester.JPG

Image:Madchester.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)