Talk:Shoegazing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Music Portal Shoegazing is within the scope of WikiProject Music genres, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardise music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the project guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good and 1.0 standards.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

	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.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the Project's importance scale.

Contents 1 Opinion 2 Dinosaur first two lps reference 3 Shoegaze vs. shoegazing 4 mistake 5 Stereolab? 6 External Links 7 Angelhead 8 Requested move 8.1 Survey 8.2 Discussion 9 Citations 10 Nugaze and current trends 11 Shoegaze Rhythm 12 Influences 13 pyschocandy 14 The Dead C, pre-Siltbreeze 15 Improving this article 16 Nu-gaze 17 Galaxie 500 18 Definitions 19 Tidy up 20 Legacy? 21 The Jesus and Mary Chain 22 Creation Records 23 Merge 24 THey Might Be Giants 25 Smashing Pumpkins 26 Starflyer 59 27 The Scene That Celebrates Itself 28 Bauhaus and The Cure 29 Renaming

[edit] Opinion

Er, I know some people who'd argue some Dinosaur Jr. songs were shoegazer. But then that's the problem with labels. They are often misapplied and often don't capture the essence of music. That said, this is an encyclopedia article so the best we can do is cite examples of bands that were tarred with this brush (that means find and link or cite the articles) and avoid subjectivity like this:

"The genre label was quite often misapplied. Key bands such as Ride, Chapterhouse and Slowdive emerged from the Thames Valley and as such Swervedriver found themselves labelled shoegazers on account of their own (coincidental) Thames Valley origins - despite their more pronounced Hüsker Dü-meets-Stooges stylings."

This is rock criticism or history and doesn't belong here. If someone called Dino Jr. shoegazers that should be cited and included. 202.82.171.186 (talk) 08:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It seems, at least to me, that the first paragraph under "Definitions" contradicts and undermines the rest of the article. It also sounds rather biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.102.237.247 (talk) 06:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dinosaur first two lps reference

I don't think that the first Dinosaur album is a good reference to early Boo Radleys. It's more of hardcore punk influenced indie-rock record than than what came after.

The two lps that followed that self titled debut - You're Living All Over Me and Bug - are better pointers.

Dinosaur Jr. is in no way related to shogazer. I see absolutely no connection. We might as well say Sonic Youth gave birth to shoegazer. -Some guy 12:59 PM

Agreed, Dinosaur Jr. is not related to shoegazing.

[edit] Shoegaze vs. shoegazing

I believe the proper genre term is "shoegaze", not "shoegazing".WesleyDodds 04:26, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

the google test seems to confirm otherwise --MilkMiruku 15:25, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

The "google test" is irrelevent here. It doesn't take into account context. A band or song could be described as "shoegazing" much in the same way I could call a rock song "rocking", but that doesn't change the name of the genre to "rocking and rolling". Your argument is short-sighted and silly. - Dustin.

fair enough, but tbh for a long time i thought it was refered to as 'shoegazer', and that gets almost as many hits as 'shoegaze', so no-one should move anything until we get multiple quotes to back up any change up :) --MilkMiruku 03:41, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Shoegaze should be the correct term. Tonearm 05:24, 21 November 2005 (UTC)Tonearm

shoegaze is how everyone i know has always known it

I've always known the genre to be called shoegaze, and allmusic calls it that. Shoegazing is what the performers did, which inspired the name. As Dustin said, rocking -> rock, so shoegazing -> shoegaze. I think allmusic is a pretty reputable source? --Casiotone 20:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's one answer here - but for what it's worth - it's always been shoegazing for me - as someone who was a big fan at the time and in the UK. I'll dig through old cuttings to see what the UK music press used most - also if you search nme.com now you'll see more hits for 'shoegazing' than 'shoegaze' (by an order of magnitude). NickW 13:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

jumping in here with nothing to back me up but experience, I know it as "shoegazer" as well. Source-hunting commences now. Cantara 23:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I think shoegaze and shoegazer are common than shoegazing, even if the NME uses it more. WesleyDodds 03:22, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

More common where? I'm starting to get the impression that 'shoegaze' is the US equivalent of the UK 'shoegazing'. NickW 08:20, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Well I'm surprised the NME's influence reached as far as the States. I thought Shoegazing was only really for people south of Oxford. In Manchester we we're still riding off the tailends of the indie-dance baggy scene. DJ HEAVEN 11:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I've also just looked on google again and it seems that shoegaze is actually twice as popular as shoegazing. --Casiotone^talk 12:32, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I've found some old Slowdive and Chapterhouse cuttings - reviews of their early singles, gigs etc.. but no mention of shoegazing yet. As for Google etc.. shouldn't we be concerned to find what the original term was? NickW 12:46, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Has anyone figured this out yet? WesleyDodds 05:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Still working on it - I think we need to see the original music press coverage - for some reason the cuttings I've dug out at home so far pre-date the introduction of the shoegazing label. I'll carry on looking... NickW 09:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard it called shoegazing before. It should be changed to shoegaze. The current name makes Wikipedia look lame and behind the times. Maluka 07:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Disagree. Your reasoning is incorrect. The genre was first described in the early nineties so how can it be anything other than behind the times? As for 'shoegazing' being lame - maybe you should try to address some of the above points before resorting to name calling. NickW 21:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Nick, Nick, Nick! Shoegazing IS LAME. I mentioned this on a music forum and people laughed hard at it being called Shoegazing. Get with the times, ok? Maluka 07:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Because it's highly possible most people refer to it as "shoegaze" these days. I know I always see "shoegaze" or "shoegazer" instead of "shoegazing". WesleyDodds 04:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

On the NME website search, the number of results for shoegazing are tenfold that of shoegaze. The google searches on the site for shoegazing and shoegaze give the same thing (and half the results for 'shoegaze' are the boards). Although the general google searches give about a million for shoegaze and half that for shoegazing, so it would seem most people today use the term shoegaze, but NME are still using shoegazing. I personally don't mind either of the terms being used for the article, but from the results it should probably be shoegaze. Either way, I think we should definitely include information about the other term being used as well in the article. --Casiotone^talk 16:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

There are a number of issues here - most importantly - what the original term was, and what the article should be called. The original term was shoegazing (like it or not e.g. see NME 8 June 1991 - [1]). Perhaps that has been supplanted by 'shoegaze'. I don't know - I can only comment as a fan of shoegazing at the time. I admit to not having followed any offshoots or derivatives of the original scene... My preference for the article title is shoegazing - because it is essentially the senior variant term / synonym etc.. Other people may prefer shoegaze if they feel it reflects more common useage at present. How you substantiate the latter I don't know - no-one has so far. P.S. Being 'Lame' has no bearing on article titles in an encyclopedia. NickW 17:44, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

At this point in time I think it's best we call the article "shoegaze". It's nice having a reference for what it was originally called, but the naming conventions of Wikipedia correspond to what people will most likely recognize in order to aid searching. From my experience, everyone I know knows it as shoegaze and even Allmusic lists the genre under shoegaze. If we do rename the article, the first sentence should probably read Shoegaze (originally called "shoegazing" and sometimes called "shoegazer") is . . . WesleyDodds 05:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Disagree - the discussion above shows both terms are still in popular use. I'm sure we all have our own experience of what the genre is referred to as - all equally limited by our respective geographic locations (and age no doubt)... As for searching on Wikipedia - that's easily solved by adding a redirect for 'shoegaze'. NickW 08:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the discussion has shown everyone else either doesn't use the phrase or is unfamiliar with it. An earlier point was brought up that NME seems to be the only entity that largely refers to it as "shoegazing". Maybe they have a trademark or something. WesleyDodds 09:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Never heard of it called "shoegaze" music, however "Shoegazing" was (somehwta sarcasticly) referred in the NME quite a lot (i believe it's one of their genre labels like Urchin Rock etc) just to group those indie band that gave the impression on stage that they were looking at their feet DJ HEAVEN 11:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

"Shoegazing" gets my vote as it's the only thing I've ever heard it called. While the NME made the term popular it was apparently first coined in a review of a Moose gig (supporting Lush) to describe the nervous appearance of the newly formed support band. I think this review appeared in 'Sounds'.--Mike2121212 15:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

"Shoegaze" gets my vote. It makes sense to me to compare it to rock, in which rock/shoegaze is the name of the genre; a rocker/shoegazer is one who performs or listens to the music; and rocking/shoegazing is what one does while listening or performing. I would never ever say "I listen to shoegazing." --EndlessVince 03:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

"Shoegazer" is the term I remember from back in the day in Ireland. I was, I'll admit, a relative late-comer to the scene (got into Swervedriver and Curve in '93 first and worked backwards to the 4AD scene). Donnacha 22:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

"Shoegaze" is the term I have always known it as since 1991 when Loveless came out. The band I managed, All Natural Lemon & Lime Flavors, played in the local NY/Philly "shoegaze" scene, where all bands here referred to it as such from about 1992 through 1998. I agree this could be a case of the States' term vs. the Brit term. limesparks 19:24, 03 November 2006 (UTC)

Last.fm says shoegaze too, look: http://www.last.fm/tag/Shoegazing // http://www.last.fm/tag/Shoegaze (ErikHK 21:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC))

I read the NME weekly and Melody Maker occasionally through the late 80's & early 90's. 'Shoegazing' and 'Shoegazer(s)' I recall. I've don't think I've ever seen 'Shoegaze' until today. Of the two magazines I think Melody Maker writers were generally more positive towards the music, NME writers tended to be more dismissive, hence the fairly negative ('lame' even) name. --Breezecatcher 21:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Shoegaze = genre, Shoegazing = action. Shoegazer would even work, but Shoegazing is just plain crass. 74.129.108.127 03:45, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

"Shoegaze" is the only term I've ever heard to describe the genre (until now) as a fan of the music for the past fifteen years. As others have said I think this must be a US/Brit distinction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.27.52 (talk) 07:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] mistake

the smiths album strangeways here we come was not released in 1979...

• I noticed that and removed it. Folkor 06:04, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stereolab?

Stereolab were influenced heavily by shoegaze, and allot of their music could be described as shoegaze itself - maybe they deserve a mention? --82.12.241.34 09:38, March 27 2006

Stereolab features a pretty through description of the band but doesn't mention shoegazing. if you feel it should, you might want to mention it on that articles talk page --MilkMiruku 12:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I really don't think shoegaze is prominent in Stereolab, their sound is very groove-oriented and I do think that the so called nugaze references are too crowded (i.e. someone self promotioning here?, haha) , they could really use some clean up. I think its important also to mention how shoegaze blended into post-rock, this happened before the remergence of shoegaze and it is noticed most of all in mogwai, which is not mentioned. I also think that a band like sonic youth is deserved being mentioned, many of the heavily distorted guitar textures that shoegaze was later on known for can be traced back to an album like Sister, although their concept and context was very different.

[edit] External Links

Should that link to Scholars and Fellows (band website) be here? Seems like we should be keeping the specific band links off of this page. Brandon 22:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I've removed it and also the link to indiepop radio, as both seem to be blatant advertisement and definitely don't belong there. I also added the alternate 'shoegaze' last.fm group, since its also quite large.

[edit] Angelhead

Does this band actually exist? I can find no references for them outside of Wikipedia, nor can I find any of their music either online or in record stores. I think we should remove them from the header, since their influence (and even their existence) seems debatable at this point.

Angelhead did exist and were well known within the goth / indie scene in the UK for a while. Not sure if I'd class them as a notable Shoegazing band though. NickW 08:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citations

The whole article seems short on citations - it could do with a lot more references. -- Beardo 16:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It's pretty poor. Looks like there's lots of original research here. "Many of the band members were young, inexperienced and shy" - non-NPOV, unreferenced. Parts of it read like a speculative essay based on personal feelings.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 06:06, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, those millions of "citation needed" tags are horrible. I think I might remove all of them, and put up a tag at the top. People shouldn't do things like that. Zweifel 09:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm with Zweifel on this one. The article has 23 requests for citations, which is quite ridiculous. Not every sentence needs to be cited, such as defining shoegazing with "It looked like they were looking at their shoes, or "shoe-gazing". Patrick925 04:19, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nugaze and current trends

How do people feel about a reference to ethereal wave in this section? It's heavily influenced by the original 4AD sound. Donnacha 02:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Under this "current trends" area, I'd like to recommend Versoma's debut EP for diehard fans of shoegazer. It could best be described as some brutal ass shoegazing.

[edit] Shoegaze Rhythm

One of the most noticeable aspects of shoegaze, that doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere in the article, is its approach to rhythm. Many if not most shoegaze songs have 2 beats going at the same time -- a regular one, in which, most often, the vocals, lead guitar and at least one rhythm instrument play, and a double time beat, often taken by the bass or rhythm guitar. The drums often play the one beat against the other, leading to the jumpy, syncopated feel of many of the songs.

The combination of beats can lend a feeling of forward thrust to songs, including ballads, that in most other styles would lack energy. This approach to rhythm was obviously not invented in the late 80's. You can hear it in some precursor music of the 60's, for example in songs by the Who and the Byrds (Eight Miles High is a good example). It is in this use of rhythms that a band like Swervedriver can be most easily associated with shoegaze.

Fotto 22:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)fotto

I call it the "Vapour Trail" rhythm. It's in most every damn shoegaze song. If someone can put this in terms of music theory, I think it'd be a welcome addition. WesleyDodds 02:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Could you explain this more clearly using an example so that I may be able to transalte it to music notation if possible?

[edit] Influences

The influences section currently states "punk-era bands such as The Cramps, Pere Ubu and The Birthday Party proved influential in some cases, especially with the forerunners of the genre". I can't see this other than in early My Bloody Valentine tracks, and they were virtually a different band by the shoegazing era. I can't think of any other bands in the genre showing these influences. Any objections to me removing this?--Michig 17:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pyschocandy

why is darklands replacing pyschocandy on the timeline? pyschocandy is clearly more of a shoegazing album. just listen to its wall-of-sound technique. 69.244.101.216 22:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

 : no, in fact i find the entire entry way too slanted and accredited to mbv. 74.129.98.104 04:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the request for a citation for Psychocandy as an influence on Shoegaze, I've come across this: http://smallswordsmagazine.com/articles/sound/shoegaze.html, perhaps someone with more experience with Wikipedia could let me know whether or not this is an acceptable source? 85.134.130.234 12:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Dead C, pre-Siltbreeze

While often pigeon-holed as a noise-rock band, The Dead C's earliest work, e.g. the Live Dead See and 43 Sketch for a Poster cassettes from 1987, and even their mid-period musical output like Trapdoor F***ing Exit are really not far from what is defined as shoegazer. Listen to the songs "Angel", "3 Years", and "Mighty" on the compilation Vain, Erudite, and Stupid to see what I mean. While perhaps not as poppy or overtly Velvet Underground and Chameleons-influenced as the movement itself, I think they qualify as at least its spiritual predecessors. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.92.126.218 (talk) 05:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Improving this article

This article seems to be getting worse and worse. Shoegazing was a shortlived UK scene with half a dozen key bands, but this article includes lots and lots of only tenuously-related stuff. I would suggest that some changes need to be made:

• My Bloody Valentine, Dinosuar Jr and Yo La Tengo tour - none were considered shoegazing bands at the time, and the scene was well underway by 1990, so this tour was an influence on what exactly?.
• Many of the bands listed as 'loosely associated with the genre' were just around at the same time and don't belong in this article. (Noisy indie-rock isn't shoegazing)
• Nu-gaze and current trends: The whole section belongs somewhere else, with just a mention here. The long list of mostly non-entity bands doesn't belong in Wikipedia at all.
• The shoegazing timeline needs trimming to just the key bands and albums - it's a mess at the moment.

Any views?--Michig 18:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I generally agree. Shoegazing was my sound of choice at the time and I struggle with the perspective that's developed in this article - especially the endless debate re: 'Shoegazing' v. later Americanised labels. There's a kind of revisionist and 'looking through a keyhole' type-thing going on. At the very least the Nu-gaze stuff should be moved to a seperate article. NickW 08:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Use the general genre page outline used at Grunge music and Britpop. That'll give the article a sensible structure. I would help out more on the article, but sources on shoegaze as a movement (as opposed to individual bands or albums) are hard to come by. WesleyDodds 15:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nu-gaze

I have removed the following text from the section "Nu-gaze and current trends== as if it's going to stay at all it should be in a separate Nu-gaze article.

The genre has the same self-contained tendencies that lead to the shoegazing label "the scene that celebrates itself." Clubs such as Club AC30, Sonic Cathedral and Club Violaine, along with the support of such labels as The Gaia Project, Elephant Stone Records, Hungry Audio, Clairecords and Bella Union (run by an ex-Cocteau Twin member) are supporting new dream-pop and shoegaze bands. There are many holdouts of devoted players and listeners on both sides of the Atlantic, and even a strong following in South America. Bands exhibiting the influence, in different ways, include Ripple Wrinkle (Atlanta) Hartfield (Japan), Shade (Pittsburgh), A Place to Bury Strangers (NYC), The Offering (Virginia), Autumn Thieves (NYC), The Colorfield Theory (Philadelphia), Skydivers (DC), Sciflyer (San Fransisco), Mean Red Spiders (Toronto), Highspire (Philadelphia/Lancaster, PA), Malory (Germany), Skywave (Virginia), Scattered Planets (Philadelphia), Brasilia (NYC), Isobella (Florida), Graze (Philadelphia), Lockgroove (Boston), Alcian Blue (DC), The Defog (Philadelphia), Plastron (Philadelphia), Carson's Machine, Asobi Seksu (NYC), Mahogany (Detroit, MI), A Sunny Day in Glasgow (Philadelphia, PA), Charlene (Boston), Project Skyward (NYC), Autodrone (NYC), Dimazza (Philadelphia), R'Tronica (NYC), L'Envoi (Philadelphia), The Opposite Sex (DC), Grayland (Virginia), Soundpool (NYC), Lst Yrs Mdl (Brooklyn), Psiconautas (Puerto Rico), Ifwhen (ex-All Natural Lemon And Lime Flavors) (NJ/NYC), Panda Riot (Philadelphia), Mellonova (Toronto), Hollowphonic (Toronto), Resplandor (Perú), Aerial Love Feed (NYC), Bastion (NYC), The Phobes (Baltimore), helicopter helicopter (Boston), Kid Snyper (Toronto), For That Day (Toronto), Dreamend (Chicago), Morticia's Chair (Cleveland), My Education (Austin, Texas), Thinking Machines (Philadelphia, PA), White Star Line (Toronto), Whirlaway (Florida), Surface of Eceon (Landing and Yume Bitsu side project-CT), Starter Culture (Philadelphia), The Emerald Down (Columbus, OH), Alaisha (Australia) and many more. The U.S. has two annual festivals dedicated to the genre, one held in Philadelphia called the Popnoise Festival, and the other in Virginia called the Walls Of Soundfest.^{[citation needed]}

--Michig 12:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Galaxie 500

I think it is worth mentioning the influence from the likes of Galaxie 500, if not a reference in the timeline. Those who have heard should know what I am talking about.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.242.26.64 (talk • contribs).

You mean a band that formed in 1988, and who were not a shoegazing band, were an influence on a scene that started in about 1987? Don't think so.--Michig 10:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Well if we are going to include Dinosaur Jr. and The Cure I say, why not? The shoegazing scene did not begin in '87 and end in '88. Galaxie 500 formed in 1986 and provided a unique atmosphere (not the first band too, I know), but before Loveless(1991!), everything else was just noise pop. Let's not forget either, bands like Slowdive and Pale Saints citing Galaxie 500.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.242.26.64 (talk • contribs).

Let's not include Dinosaur Jr. - they were regarded as part of the wave of grunge (or pre-grunge) bands that became popular in Britain in the late 80's - really nothing to do with shoegazing. As for The Cure, I believe they were an influence, and just as importantly they were around before the Shoegazing bands emerged, not at the same time like Galaxie 500. Maybe some of the shoegazing bands were influenced by Galaxie 500, and if that's the case it would be worth mentioning in the articles about those specific bands, but to qualify as an influence on the scene itself they would have had to been around earlier (according to their WP article, which has just been altered, they formed in 1987 - around the same time as Chapterhouse, Ride and Lush - and their first release was in 1988). If you think everything before 'Loveless' was 'just noise pop', maybe you should check out the first couple of Kitchens of Distinction singles (from 1987 and 1988), or the early singles from Chapterhouse, Lush, Slowdive and Ride, all of which were pre-1991.--Michig 12:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll agree with all of that but I just can't see Disintegration doing anything for the scene. That came out when, '89?

Since when did shoegaze begin in 1987? That's completely arbitrary. You've basically picked a year at random. I mean Spacemen 3's Perfect Prescription came out that year, but that was no more shoegaze than Psychcandy or Head Over Heels, which were years earlier. Isn't Anything didn't come out until two years later. For this reason it doesn't really make any sense to discount a band like Galaxie 500 as being an important influence because they released their first album the year after 1987, even though this year was basically pulled out of your ass.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.134.221.255 (talk • contribs).

I'm reluctant to enter into a discussion with someone who can't behave in a civil manner, but the term 'shoegazing' was first used in 1990, and the bands that the term was first used to describe formed in 1987 (Chapterhouse), 1988 (Lush) and 1990 (Moose). Spacemen 3 were never described as a shoegazing band back then, nor were the Jesus and Mary Chain, The Cocteau Twins or Galaxie 500 (who released their first album in February 1989 in the US, September 1989 in the UK, according to my sources). And Isn't Anything came out in 1988, just in case you find facts at all important.--Michig 15:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I suggest you get better sources! Those were the CD issuings of the first Galaxie 500 album, it was released on vinyl in the US in 1988. Though I will concede that Isn't Anything was released in November of 1988, so I was off by a whole two months. Bravo! With regard to your actual argument I am a little bit confused. Are you saying that shoegaze as a genre began in 1987 or 1990? Okay, there were bands that started in 1987 and afterwards that were refered to as shoegaze bands from about 1990. Sure that's fine. My Bloody Valentine started around 1984 (I'm not exactly sure, so don't bother finding the exact date, it's not important) and they were also most definitely being called a shoegaze band by the time 1990 rolled around. Similarly the Cocteau Twins started in 1982 and by the time they released Heaven Or Las Vegas the were being called shoegaze too. Which I should help to make clear why I'm of the opinion that 1987 is a pretty arbitrary year to say that shoegaze began. Even the shoegazing timeline in the article begins in 1984!

Oh, and I'm sorry if my inability to 'behave in a civil manner' (!!!) offends you. You can take comfort in that fact that I'll spend eternity in Geek Hades pushing a boulder up a hill. <3 Honest bob 19:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Calling me a 'fuckwit' doesn't exactly help your argument. I wouldn't want to put a start date on shoegazing as it didn't just suddenly appear one day, but usage of the term, and the bands that it was used for, did. I still can't see a big Galaxie 500 influence on the early shoegazing bands. Every genre starts somewhere and has influences (which by definition must have pre-dated the genre itself), but it doesn't make those influences part of the genre. Unless punk rock started in the 50's of course.--Michig 08:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

What? I never called you or anybody else a 'fuckwit'. Maybe you should read over what I wrote again. Anyhow, I can hear a definite Galaxie 500 influence on Slowdive, Pale Saints and early period Lush, and as I've said before I don't think the difference between 1987 and 1988 should really make any odds in this matter. There were bands that influenced the genre more, but lets face it music is constantly evolving and a band can have an influence on a genre even after that genre has come onto being (especially when it's so difficult to pinpoint when exactly it did come into being). This is the point I'm trying to make. Honest bob 19:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The idea that Galaxie 500 wasn't an influence because they didn't influence the ENTIRE scene just doesn't make sense to me. Some bands were influenced by the JAMC, some Cocteau Twins, others Galaxie 500, and the rest Spacemen 3 or Loop, etc. Galaxie 500 certainly deserve credit.

[edit] Definitions

I have added a reference to the phrase being coined in a review of a Moose gig. I have a source from 1992 which I have cited. In an interview with Steve Lamacq on BBC 6 Music in 2006, Russell Yates backed up this explanation. The idea that Andy Ross invented the term to describe members of his staff who went to see Shoegazing bands doesn't seem to hold much water - if they went to see Shoegazing bands, the term must have been in prior use, so I have removed this - it was based solely on a letter to a music magazine 15 years after the fact anyway, so is hardly reliable.--Michig 17:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tidy up

I have tidied this article up a little, removing passages that have been tagged as needing refs for a while. A few other edits:

• changed "overwhelmingly loud, distorted guitars, often with waves of feedback and buzz" to "extensive use of guitar effects" - didn't really fit bands like Lush, Chapterhouse, Moose, etc.
• I think the fact that many of the original shoegazing artists have turned to acoustic music can be accepted without requiring references.--Michig 08:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Legacy?

The area of the article on Legacy is not exactly substantial, surely the influence of 'Gaze on more modern music such as Maps and Giant Drag is worth a mention?

[edit] The Jesus and Mary Chain

How can an article trying to describe Shoegaze and it's history even pretend to start without enormous mentions of The Jesus and Mary Chain? They arent even mentioned in the current version of this article. -- 74.129.108.127 21:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree that they should be mentioned, definitely. They were around before shoegaze took off but heavily influenced the movement with Psychocandy and became influenced by shoegaze itself later on with Honey's Dead. This stuff is pretty much true, but needs reliable sources, like the All Music Guide...--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 10:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I refer to my above comment85.134.218.190 (talk) 14:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I've found a couple of sources that mention JAMC and have added these to the article.--Michig (talk) 21:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Creation Records

Same as before, no serious article on this subject can be written without mention of Creation Records Half the bands mentioned have appeared on this label, which was known for being a breeding ground and promoter of such acts. 74.129.108.127 21:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

As the article says, "the scene that celebrates itself", was a simply phrase used by journalists to refer to the shoegaze scene, so there's no reason why it should have its own article. It should be merged into this one. -- Hux 16:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

"The Scene That Celebrates Itself" was more about bands that hung around together in London and played in each others' bands - they weren't all Shoegazing bands. There's a big overlap in the bands but they're not totally the same thing.--Michig 16:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Michig. From what I remember, TSTCI was more a term used by Melody Maker to refer to a loose association of bands that basically went to each other's shows all the time. While many of those groups were lumped in with "shoegaze", there were many shoegaze bands that weren't in "The Scene" (such as, oh, Drop Nineteens and other such American bands) and (probably) many bands in "The Scene" that weren't shoegaze (though I can't remember anymore who precisely was involved). So, we certainly have two overlapping sets, with perhaps a large area of overlap, but the sets are different by definition. 207.34.120.71 15:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

And pursuant to my comment above, maybe it's a good idea to edit the Shoegazerarticle to clarify that, while some shoegaze bands might have been in TSTCI, the musical movement itself by 1990-91 was already spreading far beyond the few clubs in London where TSTCI was hanging out. 207.34.120.71 16:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The Britpop article mentions 'the scene...' in relation to early Brit pop bands, which is a something to bear in mind. The scene wasn't limited to one genre of music.85.134.172.240 (talk) 10:42, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The merge proposal has been here for nearly 4 months now, and consensus seems to be for not merging. I'll remove the tag(s) unless anyone strongly objects.--Michig (talk) 22:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I actually was about to remove the tags yesterday, but was distracted by something else. So I agree with you. However, a few sections downwards HisSpaceResearch indicated that he is against it. Although he did not provide any arguments, I suggest that we give him some time to come up with them. And we will of course be open to his argumentation. -- Pepve (talk) 00:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's been one more week. I feel it is save to conclude that consensus has been reached (this consensus includes Hux, who proposed the merger [2], but it may exclude HisSpaceResearch below). I removed the templates. -- Pepve (talk) 03:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] THey Might Be Giants

They Might Be Giants' Myspace says that they are shoe gaze. Probably a joke, but since I read the article and still don't understand it, I guess there is a possibility.

It must be a joke. They're not remotely shoegaze, whether musically or stylistically. It would be like saying Barenaked Ladies is shoegaze! ;) -- Hux 08:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smashing Pumpkins

Should the The Smashing Pumpkins be mentioned in the article, as a main stream arstist that was influenced by shoegaze? If not please explain. Thanks --buzlink 05:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

If you have references to reliable sources that back this up, then by all means add it.--Michig 07:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Their sound. --Clinton (talk) 03:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

That's a nice suggestion. But not an answer to the question of reliable sources. Please see WP:OR if you're curious about Wikipedia's policy regarding these kinds of issues. -- Pepve (talk) 03:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

From Smashing Pumpkins

• The Smashing Pumpkins' distinctive sound... involved layering numerous guitar tracks onto a song during the recording process...

From shoegazing

• Common musical elements in shoegazing are distortion (aka "fuzzbox"), droning riffs and a "wall of sound" from noisy guitars. Typically, two distorted rhythm guitars are played together to give an amorphous quality to the sound.

Seems about the same. And then, there is this, coming straight from the Smashing Pumpkins article

• ...Alan Moulder was originally hired to mix Siamese Dream because Corgan was a fan of his work producing shoegaze bands such as My Bloody Valentine, Ride, and Slowdive.

The editor does cite a source on that one too.

Clinton (talk) 01:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

The Pitchfork article about the documentary 'Beautiful Noise' mentions Billy Corgan as one of the 'noisemakers who owe a debt to shoegaze'. The article is already used a source on this page, so perhaps you could use that.85.134.188.75 (talk) 13:10, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Starflyer 59

Although not as well-known as others, Starflyer 59 definitely deserves a mention. See: Silver, Gold, and Americana. SenorPsychotique 23:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Scene That Celebrates Itself

I strongly support a merge and redirect to this article, of any sourcable content from that article.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 10:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Just a few headings upwards there's a discussion on this subject (#Merge). Might I suggest that you provide some of your arguments there? Thanks. -- Pepve (talk) 00:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm leaning towards an oppose to the the merge. "The scene" wasn't synonymous with shoegaze; although it included a number of shoegaze bands, there were some (like Blur) that were not. A brief overview of "The scene" is provided in John Harris' book on Britpop. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to take this opportunity to urge every contributor to keep the discussion centralised. It's not that hard, just press page-up or click here: Talk:Shoegazing#Merge. Thank you. -- Pepve (talk) 12:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Note: I concluded above that consensus is not to merge the articles. Please object there. -- Pepve (talk) 03:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I've redirected The Secne That Celebrates Itself here. If someone restores it, I might consider an AfD.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 07:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the redirect in line with consensus reached here, and improved The Scene That Celebrates Itself with references. I feel the article is now much better than it was and explains quite clearly that it was not at the time synonymous with 'Shoegazing'. User:HisSpaceResearch has seen fit to nominate The Scene That Celebrates Itself for deletion despite this. Editors who contributed to the recent discussion (and anyone else for that matter) may wish to contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Scene That Celebrates Itself. --Michig (talk) 20:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bauhaus and The Cure

I'm planning to remove Bauhaus and the Cure from the Influences section, unless someone can provide an adequate source (or sources) stating that these two bands influenced shoegaze. The article from The Muso definitely isn't appropriate. Whoever decided to cite that as a source must have not read the article: it only states that 'bands such as The Cure, Bauhaus and Cocteau Twins could well be seen as precursors'. This is a long way from stating that these bands were influences on shoegaze. Precursor and influence are not interchangeable terms; they do not mean the same thing! The author of this article isn't even confident enough to explicitly state that these acts are precursors, only that they could be seen as precursors. This is a long way from explicitly stating that The Cure and Bauhaus influenced the shoegaze scene, which is essentially what would be required from such a source. 85.134.154.53 (talk) 01:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Lists of artists — when describing influences, followers, etc. — are inherently problematic. And even more so on Wikipedia, because every fanboy wants his artist in the list. So I don't like to spend a lot of time on them, the effect/effort ratio is too low. That said, go ahead, as long as you do not completely delete the reference. -- Pepve (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I added that in because the article has suffered in the past from all sorts of pathetic claims that certain bands were influences on shoegazing, always without references. I think The Cure were an influence, but Bauhaus probably not, but didn't feel it was right to pick out only the bands that I agreed with from the article. I don't mind you removing these, but don't want to see the list go back to being an unreferenced mess of individual editors' POV.--Michig (talk) 17:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I realise that finding appropriate references for this article is a bit of a nightmare, but I do agree about The Cure deserving a mention. I'll do my best to find a better reference for them before I remove anything.85.134.185.199 (talk) 00:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

A fair number of shoegaze bands started as goth or goth-oriented (MBV and Lush, to name two). I don't think either Bauhaus or The Cure could be considered major influences for the genre as a whole, though. The Mary Chain, Cocteau Twins, Husker Du, and Dinosaur Jr seem like the most common influences for shoegaze bands. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

With its wall of sound production, The Cure's Disintegration album (e.g. Plainsong) bears similarities to shoegaze music and in me and my friends' opinion they were an influence on 'shoegazers'. Or maybe shoegazers influenced them, or maybe it was just that this album sold a lot of records. Tough business, writing an encyclopedia article on a genre. this is why professional writers build articles out of quotes -- it avoids all this subjectivity. 202.82.171.186 (talk) 08:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Disintegration came out after Isn't Anything, so I doubt it had any influence on shoegaze. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming

Apparently there's been a vote on the name of this article - again - last time (see above) there was no consensus and the original 'shoegazing' term stayed. Surely this latest vote should have likewise been discussed here, so people with an interest and knowledge of this subject could participate? Not impressed. NickW (talk) 22:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

To add to above - the guidelines here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_moves suggest the renaming hasn't been carried out as it should have. Can anyone involved please add some info. here. NickW (talk) 13:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)