[Archived] Blur & Oasis

[Sverre]

When I studied at york university, I was once asked which of Oasis and Blur I preferred and I answered Oasis. The reply I got was something like this:

"but that's a working class band... I listen to Blur because they are a middle class band"

This isn't me trying to start a discussion about which of those bands are musically better or me trying to have a go at a slightly different culture, but rather why the class background of the band matters to some British listeners?

And has it traditionally been that way, that musical taste has been divided by class in England?

[Rover Down Under]

Interesting discussion Sverre. I guess being from Norway you are (or were) not yet altogether familiar with the British press. I remember the whole Oasis = working class vs Blur = middle class argument as well but I think it was something bandied about by the Southern press to try and polarise fans and create what we now commonly know as "fanboys". There was an intense rivalry between the two bands, further inflamed by the whole "Roll With It" vs "Country House" battle for number one around the time I was recovering from a 3-month-long celebratory binge

To be frank it was a load of ###### cooked up by the Southern dominated press because their darling Laaahndaaahn boys were pretty good (and best hope for a LONG time) but a very distant second to yet another North-West band that were clearly going to trounce them in creativity, sales, market dominance, concerts (Maine Road '96 - unforgettable!) and swearing. No-one really cares much about the class backgrounds of the bands and that goes all the way back to The Beatles. I expect that person you mention who listened to Blur "because they are middle class" was some twit who had never ventured out of Surrey till he was 18, ended up at his second-choice Uni, and feeling homesick for Mummy's apron strings in the midst of all the Yorkshire pudding, warm beer and Dingle folk needed to ostentatiously differentiate himself via the popular culture of...ummmm...pop by identifying with a bands class background rather than the music they produced.

Funny though, I remember thinking that Blur were far more working-class with their cockney w@nker songs like 'Parklife'...

Aaahhhh, Britpop, and that late 80's early 90's era was probably the last time we had some decent musical talent before we were overrun with manufactured morons and reality TV rubbish [raising flameproof shields].

[Nate]

All in your opinion RDU

I like both bands, but prefer Blur. Not as miserable!

But being from Australia, I never equated either based on class.

[LeChuck]

When I studied at york university, I was once asked which of Oasis and Blur I preferred and I answered Oasis. The reply I got was something like this:

"but that's a working class band... I listen to Blur because they are a middle class band"

I've heard/had this discussion countless times over the last 15 years or so with all different kinds of people, and never once heard that as an argument. It sounds like the opinion of one strange individual, I wouldn't generalise opinions on social classes based on one person. Plus you always get those pompous types at uni - RDU's assessment is probably very close to the truth.

Mind you...Blur is the correct answer by a long way! As musicians it's not even a contest really, Oasis don't even come close. They were more about the 'Madchester' indie lifestyle than the music tbh. The Masterplan was pretty good in fairness, but the rest was very samey, except for the odd pop anthem. Blur always managed to keep it fresh by moving between genres seamlessly, and they were more of an album band...although their 'best of' still has loads more songs than Oasis'.

Aaahhhh, Britpop, and that late 80's early 90's era was probably the last time we had some decent musical talent

...in the mainstream. There is masses of musical talent around, it just doesn't get anywhere near the charts or mainstream media any more. You should try giving BBC 6music a listen, you can stream things over there I think. I'd suggest Marc Riley's show as a good starting point, he has loads of new bands on there and a lot of is brilliant. Have a listen to the 'Jim Noir' one on there, he's really good.

[ABBEY]

There both ######!

[adopted scouser]

Give me Beatles soundalikes Oasis anyday

[rosie]

I, personally, like both (and did all through the whole Country House/Morning Glory(?) competition. But it does make me laugh that one of the ex members of Blur is now a cheese creator, and very successful he is too!

[colin]

I, personally, like both (and did all through the whole Country House/Morning Glory(?) competition. But it does make me laugh that one of the ex members of Blur is now a cheese creator, and very successful he is too!

Yup, me too. I liked both Blur & Oasis & I never saw any reason why anyone would be daft enough to choose one of them over the other.

It was all just media frenzy to somehow polarize people to say they either liked Blur or they liked Oasis. No one was ever given the option of saying that they liked both bands. People got fooled into taking sides when they really shouldn't have.

And Alex James (ex of Blur) is now making a living out of making cheese. All the best to him. Beats Celebrity Dancing On Ice X factor In The Jungle Get Me Out Of Here I've Got Talent.

A nice piece of Wensleydale Gromit?

[LeChuck]

And Alex James (ex of Blur) is now making a living out of making cheese. All the best to him. Beats Celebrity Dancing On Ice X factor In The Jungle Get Me Out Of Here I've Got Talent.

I wouldn't say he's quite as dignified as that. He's a bit of a media whore at times and has appeared on a few trashy programs.

Slightly ironically, given that X Factor was in your post, he was a judge on Sky's version of the show that was meant to be for 'real' musicians. He's done MTV Cribs and quite a few other things as well, his face often pops up on TV.

Still though, I do like the guy. His column in the Independent is always a good read.

[Rover Down Under]

...in the mainstream. There is masses of musical talent around, it just doesn't get anywhere near the charts or mainstream media any more. You should try giving BBC 6music a listen, you can stream things over there I think. I'd suggest Marc Riley's show as a good starting point, he has loads of new bands on there and a lot of is brilliant. Have a listen to the 'Jim Noir' one on there, he's really good.

Cheers LeChuck, good plan, always liked Marc Riley. I've heard a few belting tunes on there already, although occassionally the song details don't appear in the "Now Playing" frame, grrrrr...

But it does make me laugh that one of the ex members of Blur is now a cheese creator, and very successful he is too!

A Cheesemaker eh? Well Jesus did say they were blessed didn't he.

[LeChuck]

Cheers LeChuck, good plan, always liked Marc Riley. I've heard a few belting tunes on there already, although occassionally the song details don't appear in the "Now Playing" frame, grrrrr...

No problem, it's a great show, glad someone else likes it!

They list all the tracks played on the shows in the 'Tracklists' section. They do this with all the shows in 6music, it's really handy - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00c72y1/episodes/2011

Missed last night's shows...didn't realise Wooden Shjips were on! Been listening to their new album loads recently.

I've really got into Tom Ravenscroft's show as well. I found out after a few weeks of listening that he's John Peel's son - no wonder he's a good DJ, he's probably got the best record collection in the land.

[Tom]

Is it just me or is there roughly 739 identical looking and sounding indie type bands around at the minute?

Every other week I see a new advert for some album by another identical sounding band.

[Ozz]

I've really got into Tom Ravenscroft's show as well. I found out after a few weeks of listening that he's John Peel's son - no wonder he's a good DJ, he's probably got the best record collection in the land.

But he's a terribly boring presenter though.

[ABBEY]

It's like asking which is worst the squits or piles!

[Billy Castell]

Oasis or Blur????

My answer-Pulp.

(Though I do like both the others).

[colin]

But he's a terribly boring presenter though.

But does he play some music that you like listen to?

And just to address other posters , musical preferences are just and fine and dandy. If you like folk music that's OK. If you're into heavy metal then that's fine too. If you like soul or funk or reggae then that's fine too.

This has always been a bit of a bug-bear with me. Just because you like one particular genre of music, why do you insult people who like other genres of music? I've never really understood that attitude.

Any answers anyone?

Cheers

[Rovermatt]

I'm as middle class as they come and I've always been an Oasis man. Song 2 aside, I've never really rated Blur.

[MarkBRFC71]

Oasis or Blur????

My answer-Pulp.

(Though I do like both the others).

Although all 3 must bow to the might of The Verve in their pomp ....

[Jimmy Jupiter]

After witnessing Pulp at Leeds festival this year, Jarvis strides ahead of both Noel and Damon.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

When I studied at york university, I was once asked which of Oasis and Blur I preferred and I answered Oasis. The reply I got was something like this:

"but that's a working class band... I listen to Blur because they are a middle class band"

This isn't me trying to start a discussion about which of those bands are musically better or me trying to have a go at a slightly different culture, but rather why the class background of the band matters to some British listeners?

And has it traditionally been that way, that musical taste has been divided by class in England?

Everything that is rotten about this country summed up in one sentence.

[K-Hod]

When I studied at york university, I was once asked which of Oasis and Blur I preferred and I answered Oasis. The reply I got was something like this:

"but that's a working class band... I listen to Blur because they are a middle class band"

This isn't me trying to start a discussion about which of those bands are musically better or me trying to have a go at a slightly different culture, but rather why the class background of the band matters to some British listeners?

And has it traditionally been that way, that musical taste has been divided by class in England?

Christ, if that's the case, where do Radiohead come in?

[Sandiway Blue]

Although i`m technically `working class` i did like both Blur and Oasis.

Oasis`s first 2 albums were brilliant but after that they went downhill for me (apart from the excellent `masterplan` although it doesn`t really count as they were mainly b-sides that had been made from back when they were good ).

Blur seemed to be steady right up to splitting up and i defy anybody not to tap their feet to the brilliant `song 2`.

So to be honest i don`t see why people had to choose between one or the other.At the time it was rather boring to me because i couldn`t see the point in the North/South divide thing that in all honestly seemed to be mentioned more by the southern based press rather than the northern based press.

[neekoy]

There both ######!

Sorry for quoting ABS but this is perfect

[The Gull]

Although all 3 must bow to the might of The Verve in their pomp ....

Is right, A Northern Soul is a great album but Urban Hymms gets all the plaudits due to it being more commercial orientated.

I also listened, and still do on occasion, to both Blur and Oasis.

[Clitherover]

I was massive on Oasis in the mid nineties but in hindsight I prefer Blur.

Don't reckon class had much to do with it more a North/South thing, but then again there's more middle class people living in the South than the North so who knows?